From editor@telecom-digest.org Tue Nov 16 21:41:25 2004 Received: (from ptownson@localhost) by massis.lcs.mit.edu (8.11.6p3/8.11.6) id iAH2fO418558; Tue, 16 Nov 2004 21:41:25 -0500 (EST) Date: Tue, 16 Nov 2004 21:41:25 -0500 (EST) From: editor@telecom-digest.org Message-Id: <200411170241.iAH2fO418558@massis.lcs.mit.edu> X-Authentication-Warning: massis.lcs.mit.edu: ptownson set sender to editor@telecom-digest.org using -f To: ptownson Approved: patsnewlist Subject: TELECOM Digest V23 #551 TELECOM Digest Tue, 16 Nov 2004 21:41:00 EST Volume 23 : Issue 551 Inside This Issue: Editor: Patrick A. Townson Al Qaeda Defies Saudi Manhunt With High Web Profile (Lisa Minter) Radio Goes Digital (Lisa Minter) Google Finds its Way Onto Cellphones (Monty Solomon) C-SPAN: LoC/The Digital Future (Monty Solomon) Hi, Vonage User Here (Scott V) Great Deals on Headsets (Steve) SBC to Announce VoIP Tests (Telecom dailyLead from USTA) Re: Chechen Rebel Web Site Reopened (Bob Goudreau) Re: Movie Studios to Sue Internet File Traders (jmeissen@aracnet.com) Re: Inexepnsive Remote Forwarding by Auto Attendant Over Vonage (Aujoe) Re: Wired News: American Passports to Get Chipped (Scott Dorsey) Re: Vonage Tech Support Dead? (DevilsPGD) Re: Satellite Receiver Calling Out Over VOIP? (DevilsPGD) Last Laugh! The Parrot (Lisa Minter) All contents here are copyrighted by Patrick Townson and the individual writers/correspondents. Articles may be used in other journals or newsgroups, provided the writer's name and the Digest are included in the fair use quote. By using -any name or email address- included herein for -any- reason other than responding to an article herein, you agree to pay a hundred dollars to the recipients of the email. =========================== Addresses herein are not to be added to any mailing list, nor to be sold or given away without explicit written consent. Chain letters, viruses, porn, spam, and miscellaneous junk are definitely unwelcome. We must fight spam for the same reason we fight crime: not because we are naive enough to believe that we will ever stamp it out, but because we do not want the kind of world that results when no one stands against crime. Geoffrey Welsh =========================== See the bottom of this issue for subscription and archive details and the name of our lawyer; other stuff of interest. ---------------------------------------------------------------------- From: Lisa Minter Subject: Al Qaeda Defies Saudi Manhunt with High Web Profile Date: Tue, 16 Nov 2004 14:03:06 EST Despite the killing of top contributors, including one of its leading Web magazine editors Issa Saad bin Oshan, the group has continued to publish its two widely distributed magazines regularly for the past year. "It's testament to the strength of al Qaeda in Saudi Arabia that they've been able to bring out the magazines twice a month for a whole year despite very heavy losses," said Paul Eedle, a London-based analyst who closely follows Qaeda sites. "This shows how a small group can continue a campaign using the Internet. Before the days of the Internet a group would pretty much fade from view if they were reduced in numbers like al Qaeda in Saudi Arabia," he said. Oshan ran Sawt al-Jihad (Voice of Holy War) -- the most important vehicle for disseminating the group's ideas in which he detailed how Saudis could take up the armed struggle against the United States. He called on Muslims to evict "crusaders" from the cradle of Islam and praised comrades fighting pro-U.S. rulers. Another key publication is Muaskar al-Battar (Battar Camp), an al Qaeda guerrilla manual named after a favorite sword of Prophet Mohammad which disseminates knowledge about the use of arms and explosives and how to kill officials and citizens of the U.S. Oshan was killed in a raid by Saudi security forces on a hideout that led to the discovery of the head of Paul Johnson, the American hostage who was killed by his Qaeda captors in Saudi Arabia in June. Top oil exporter Saudi Arabia has waged a massive manhunt, killing or arresting some 17 of the 26 most wanted militants. "I have been astonished by the magazines' continuity, even though their content has suffered lately. This is one of the best media campaigns by a terrorist group," said an analyst from a European defense studies institute who declined to be named. London-based Islamic activist Yasser al-Sirri said a small group of followers may be helping publish the magazines under the control of Saudi al Qaeda leaders. The magazines often carry interviews with senior militants vowing to fight until death. RECRUITING THROUGH MAGAZINES? US authorities have tried to block access to the magazines and other Islamist sites to curb the spread of their ideas. But analysts say the ability of the magazines in actually mobilizing al Qaeda sympathizers is debatable. "It's a very big leap from reading militant texts, posting messages and sympathizing to actually acting. I think that leap normally requires a personal contact," Eedle said. The defense analyst added: "The Internet may seem as a fantastic virtual meeting place, but it cannot replace a training camp." The magazines prompted alarm among some security experts, who say militants were turning the Web into a virtual classroom. One posting showed how to use a mobile phone in a bomb attack, a method used in blasts that killed 191 on Madrid trains in March. Israeli analyst Reuven Paz said Islamists had more success in winning over youths than Arab nationalists or socialists. "The Islamists create through the Internet a 'culture of the oppressed'," said Paz, an expert on Islamist movements. But American authorities claim the fears may be exaggerated and that most of the material was propaganda. *** FAIR USE NOTICE. This message contains copyrighted material the use of which has not been specifically authorized by the copyright owner. This Internet discussion group is making it available without profit to group members who have expressed a prior interest in receiving the included information in their efforts to advance the understanding of literary, educational, political, and economic issues, for non-profit research and educational purposes only. I believe that this constitutes a 'fair use' of the copyrighted material as provided for in section 107 of the U.S. Copyright Law. If you wish to use this copyrighted material for purposes of your own that go beyond 'fair use,' you must obtain permission from the copyright owner, in this instance, Reuters News Service. For more information go to: http://www.law.cornell.edu/uscode/17/107.shtml ------------------------------ From: Lisa Minter Subject: Radio Goes Digital Date: Tue, 16 Nov 2004 14:04:25 -0500 (EST) Patrick Norton - ExtremeTech Radio hasn't changed much in the past couple of decades. Sure, there was the big switch from mechanical pushbuttons, knobs and cable-driven needles to electrical pushbuttons and digital LCD screens. Stereo AM made its less-than-stunning debut. On the car audio front, a typical head unit's gone from being a radio to being a radio with a built-in cassette deck, to being a radio with a built-in CD player. That said, AM and FM radio tuners have definitely gotten better, a fact I realized when I drove an ancient Toyota with a genuine factory radio from the late '70s, and no cassette or CD player, a few months ago. Radio stations, I noticed, haven't changed all that much, except that more of them sound exactly the same. What has changed for the better is that radio is finally going digital, at least in part. First with the introduction of satellite radio a couple of years ago and now, earlier this year, with the introduction of HD Radio has started to make serious leaps and bounds for the first time since the '70s. The two systems are both digital, but that's about all they have in common. The newest is HD Radio, developed by iBiquity Digital. It promises to bring CD-quality FM and static-free AM to any station that licenses (and implements) the technology. Along with crystal-clear music or talk radio, it also can do things such as deliver data over your car stereo's head unit, including the name of the band you're listening to, news tidbits or even stock quotes. Satellite radio offerings from XM and Sirius each distribute more than a hundred channels of music, info and entertainment via satellite, everywhere in the United States. The coverage even spills over into a fair chunk of Mexico and Canada. Want to listen to one classical station in your car when you drive from San Francisco to Long Beach Island, N.J.? Satellite radio can do that, at least until you pass through a good-sized tunnel; then it cuts out until you're out the other side. Just want to enjoy commercial-free music while you're commuting? Both satellite providers offer more than 60 different channels. Sound good? It does to me. These new digital radio formats have me fired up about radio again. Just for fun, let's get a little deeper and see if we can't dig up a few more diamonds in the world of digital radio. We're bound to uncover a few lumps of coal, too. Satellite Radio: Did We Mention the Monthly Fee? Let's get the first gotcha of digital radio out of the way: Both XM and Sirius charge a monthly subscription fee. Barring a bulk purchase of multiple months (or years) at once, you'll be paying $9.99 per month for XM or $12.95 per month for Sirius. You'll also need an XM or Sirius tuner, most likely a satellite radio that plugs into your car or home stereo, or some kind of box that brings satellite radio to the XM- or Sirius-ready head unit that's already in your car. While there are many car stereos that can add in a satellite radio module, our favorite tuner forms are portable and lend themselves to easy movement from the car to the house. Delphi's XM-compatible Delphi XM Roady2 earned an Editors' Choice award from PC Magazine for its iPod-like size and built-in FM modulator. That means no carrying around extra cables or cassette adapters, since you can use your FM radio to pick up the signal from the Roady2. Its modular build means you can also use it in a portable, Walkman-style carrier, or in a home base station. The Roady2 is a touch smaller than its comparable Sirius tuner, the Sirius Sportster. One advantage the Sportster offers: When you set it for your favorite football team, it'll display its logo on the monitor and automatically change the channel when your team starts playing a game. Both of those satellite radio tuners can be had for less than $100 on sale, plus the monthly fee. ($9.99 for XM or $12.95 for Sirius.) If you're willing to spend about $200 more, you can get a boom box complete with AM/FM tuner and CD player that you can pop your XM tuner into. You can read more about it in PC Magazine. On the new-car front, more manufacturers committed to putting compatible head units into new cars (Daimler-Chrysler and Ford offer Sirius, while Honda and GM favor XM). Sirius has some hi-fi manufactures, such as AudioVox and Kenwood making radios for your home stereo. But XM has the lead in portable hardware, with the announcement of Delphi's MyFi, the first portable, self-powered satellite radio. It's expected to ship this December for $349. What Do You Get for the Monthly Fee? In exchange for that monthly fee, you get an amazing array of programming. XM offers 68 commercial-free music channels out of 130 total channels. Sirius, which started the commercial-free music craze, offers 65 music channels from 120. Both offer similar music programming (dedicated channels for just about everything from dance music to bluegrass), along with a range of news and entertainment channels. We won't get into the other offerings too deeply here, except to say that XM has exclusive rights to Major League Baseball and NASCAR Radio, while Sirius holds the keys to NFL football, National Public Radio and, in 2006, Howard Stern. What Is HD Radio, Anyway? While satellite radio's dedicated content channels and commercial-free music are probably pulling people away from AM and FM radio (albeit slowly, since XM and Sirius combined have roughly 3 million listeners, and there are tens of millions of radio listeners in the United States), HD Radio is designed to improve your experience with your favorite local stations. It's a nationwide standard, chosen by the FCC in 2002. Your HD Radio will work anywhere in the United States. Assuming you have HD Radio being broadcast in your area. (More on that in a moment.) HD Radio is essentially iBiquity's IBOC (In-Band On-Channel) Digital Audio Broadcasting technology. It essentially sandwiches the regular analog transmission with a pair of sideband transmissions. These digital transmissions don't interfere with stations nearby on the dial but still manage to carry a high-quality audio copy of the regular analog broadcast, and can carry additional information the station wished to add in. (The ubiquitous example of stock quotes has been mentioned, but things such as track titles and artists' names are most common.) Because the signals are split across two different frequencies, intelligence in the tuner can work them against each other and work around some of the traditional analog reception problems such as multipath interference (when your tuner picks up the same signal at different times after it's been bounced around, say, the buildings in your downtown area) and other causes of distortion. iBquity debuted the first HD Radio receiver back in January, and they're still fairly rare. According to iBiquity's site, JVC, Kenwood, Panasonic and Boston Acoustics all offer HD Radio receivers. We've had to work to find them for sale in local electronics stores, and with the suggested retail on a car head unit at $700 to $800, they're a bit spendy. The Boston Acoustics Receptor will cost closer to $149.) There are a fair number of HD Radio stations broadcasting, at least according to iBiquity's map of HD Radio stations. Here in San Francisco, there are a fair number of HD radio stations on the air in a wide range of formats, from AM news to jazz stations to the lone local classical and country stations. Should you purchase an HD Radio? We'd start by checking iBiquity's map to find out whether any of your favorite stations are already broadcasting in HD. Then we'd try to find a local shop (or one of the engineers at that radio station) to give us a demo of the HD sound. If you like it and you can afford the tuner, it should be a nice upgrade. But don't worry if you don't want to spend the money: Analog radio isn't going away anytime soon. Patrick Norton has written more than 500 product reviews for print and online media and loves off-road racing. Patrick is best known for answering the toughest tech questions, giving product-purchasing advice and smashing dead PCs with a sledgehammer during a four-year stint when he co-hosted "The Screen Savers" on TechTV (now G4techTV), an hour-long, live TV show for geeks. *** FAIR USE NOTICE. This message contains copyrighted material the use of which has not been specifically authorized by the copyright owner. This Internet discussion group is making it available without profit to group members who have expressed a prior interest in receiving the included information in their efforts to advance the understanding of literary, educational, political, and economic issues, for non-profit research and educational purposes only. I believe that this constitutes a 'fair use' of the copyrighted material as provided for in section 107 of the U.S. Copyright Law. If you wish to use this copyrighted material for purposes of your own that go beyond 'fair use,' you must obtain permission from the copyright owner, in this instance Tech Tuesday and Reuters News Service. For more information go to: http://www.law.cornell.edu/uscode/17/107.shtml ------------------------------ Date: Tue, 16 Nov 2004 17:44:34 -0500 From: Monty Solomon Subject: Google Finds its Way Onto Cellphones Search engine company quietly launches service By Peter J. Howe, Globe Staff | November 15, 2004 Google has come to cellphones -- the cheap ones, not just the fancy color-screen models with Web access. Over the last month, the popular search engine company has quietly turned on a new service that lets people use most newer cellphone models to get snippets of information by sending short text messages to a special five-digit number, 46645, which spells GOOGL on a phone keypad. People looking for a list of pizza or Chinese restaurants in Back Bay, for example, just have to send the message "pizza 02116" or "Chinese 02116." Within 10 seconds or so, Google shoots back one or more text messages listing restaurants with addresses and phone numbers from its Google Local page. Related services from Google let users get a phone number by sending a message containing the desired person's first and last names and city, area code, or ZIP code; they can also use Google's Froogle shopping site to get a price quote by sending a text message with "price" followed by the item's name or Universal Product Code number. http://www.boston.com/business/technology/articles/2004/11/15/google_finds_its_way_onto_cellphones/ ------------------------------ Date: Tue, 16 Nov 2004 19:24:25 -0500 From: Monty Solomon Subject: C-SPAN: LoC/The Digital Future http://www.c-span.org/congress/digitalfuture.asp LIBRARY OF CONGRESS The Digital Future SERIES DESCRIPTION Beginning Monday, November 15, 2004 until March 2005, C-SPAN will televise live a series of discussions hosted by the Library of Congress' John W. Kluge Center. The series will examine how the digital age is changing the most basic ways information is organized and classified. The goal is to educate the public on the what the digital age means to their lives. The events will include a featured speaker, followed by a panel discussion, and a question and answer session with the audience at the venue, and C-SPAN television viewers. Our viewers will be invited to email questions to the experts. ------------------------------------------------------------- SERIES SCHEDULE 2004 Monday, November 15 David Weinberger, one of North America's best known experts on "blogging" and coauthor of the bestselling book, "The Cluetrain Manifesto" (2000). Weinberger is also author of "Small pieces, loosely joined: a unified theory of the web" (2002), a frequent commentator on National Public Radio's "All Things Considered" and "Here and Now," and has been published in many magazines including Wired and the Harvard Business Review. rtsp://video.c-span.org/project/digital/digitalfuture111504.rm Monday, December 13 at 6:30pm ET Brewster Kahle, digital librarian, director and cofounder of the Internet Archive Kahle will explain how and why capturing material on the Web is important and discuss the challenges of selecting pertinent content. ---------------------------------------------------------------- 2005 Monday, January 31 at 6:30pm ET Brian Cantwell Smith, dean of the Faculty of Information Studies at the University of Toronto Smith, the author of "On the Origin of Objects," combines degrees in computer science and philosophy and is an expert on the interdisciplinary convergence brought about by orgitization. His talk is titled, "And Is All This Stuff Really Digital After All?" Monday, February 14 at 6:30pm ET David M. Levy, professor at the Information School of the University of Washington Levy is the author of "Scrolling Forward: Making Sense of Documents in the Digital Age," and he will discuss the shift of the experience of reading from the fixed page to movable electrons and the effect that has had on language. Thursday, March 3 at 6:30pm ET Lawrence Lessig, professor of law at Stanford Law School and founder of the Stanford Center for Internet and Society Lessig is the author of "Code and Other Laws of Cyberspace" and an expert on the issues of copyright and "copyleft." He is the inventor of the revolutionary concept and application Creative Commons, which invites the right to use material under specific conditions. Monday, March 14 at 6:30pm ET Edward L. Ayers, dean of the College and Graduate School of Arts and Sciences at the University of Virginia Ayers is the author (with Anne S. Rubin) of "The Valley of the Shadow: Two Communities in the American Civil War" on CD-ROM. Among the questions Ayers will address are the implications for the creation and distribution of knowledge in today's digital environment. Monday, March 28 at 6:30pm ET Neil Gershenfeld, director of the Center for Bits and Atoms at the Massachusetts Institute of Technology Gershenfeld is the author of "When Things Start to Think." His new concept Internet Zero (0) proposes a new infrastructure for the existing Internet that would give an IP address to all electronic devices - from light bulbs to Internet addresses and URLs - and interconnect them directly, thereby eliminating much intermediating code and server technology. His topic is "From the Library of Information to the Library of Things." Copyright 2004, National Cable Satellite Corporation ------------------------------ From: Scott V Date: Tue, 16 Nov 2004 17:27:16 -0500 Subject: Hi, Vonage User Here Hi all, I use Vonage. I use an ATA and Linksys router with a cable modem. I love the sound quality of vonage and I hope that telephone companies go this way to get rid of standard phones. Well not get totally rid of it but get more households using it because its a great service. Later all, Scott ------------------------------ From: Steve Subject: Great Deals on Headsets Organization: BellSouth Internet Group Date: Tue, 16 Nov 2004 18:05:00 -0500 Now available for the first time in the US. Direct connect headsets for Nortel, Mitel, Toshiba, NEC, Samsung, 3Com, ESI, Panasonic and many more keyset models. Manufactured and sold internationally for almost 5 years, these professional quality call center grade are now available at a fraction of the cost of their Plantronics and GN Netcom competition. Check them out at: http://tdiheadsets.com/ ------------------------------ Date: Tue, 16 Nov 2004 12:56:16 EST From: Telecom dailyLead from USTA Subject: SBC to Announce VoIP Tests http://www.dailylead.com/latestIssue.jsp?i=17535&l=2017006 TODAY'S HEADLINES NEWS OF THE DAY * SBC to announce VoIP tests BUSINESS & INDUSTRY WATCH * Adelphia Communications sets $17.5 billion minimum bid * Report: Comcast's VoIP plans picking up steam * Yahoo!, EarthLink beef up their anti-spam barrier USTA SPOTLIGHT * Order Phone Facts 2005 and Broadband Facts together and save! EMERGING TECHNOLOGIES * Electric companies see multiple advantages to BPL REGULATORY & LEGISLATIVE * Lucent faces bribery allegations Follow the link below to read quick summaries of these stories and others. http://www.dailylead.com/latestIssue.jsp?i=17535&l=2017006 http://www.dailylead.com/usta/usta_passiton.jsp ------------------------------ From: Bob Goudreau Subject: Re: Chechen Rebel Web Site Reopened Date: Tue, 16 Nov 2004 14:30:00 -0500 [Please remove my address from both this message and from the Digest's Table of Contents.] > BobGoudreau@withheld wrote: >> either Lisa or Reuters made a typo. >> And indeed, www.kavzazcenter.com comes up fine in my browser. > Thanks, Bob, but "kavzaz"??? > D**n those typos! But, we know what you mean :-) D'oh! I had to go and make a whole *new* typo! :-( Of course I meant www.kavkazcenter.com BTW, I googled the original misspelled domain name ("kavkavcenter. com") and found lots of hits on the Reuters article that Lisa originally cited. So the original confusion was Reuters' fault all along. Lisa (unlike me) was at least able to type correctly! Bob Goudreau Cary, NC ------------------------------ From: jmeissen@aracnet.com Subject: Re: Movie Studios to Sue Internet File Traders Date: 16 Nov 2004 18:40:25 GMT Organization: http://extra.newsguy.com > [TELECOM Digest Editor's Note: At the Independence Cinema over on 8th > and Laurel Streets, ... They do show about ten minutes worth of > advertising (mostly for local merchants) before the movie starts, > interspersed with reminders that no smoking is allowed, follow the > rules, etc, to give you a chance to eat your five dollar little > skimpy bucket of popcorn and your little cup of beverage. Ha! We should be so lucky. We also get the ads and the promos for the concession stand before the movie. I don't mind them, the ads are mostly local content and it helps fill the time until the show starts. But then, at the scheduled start time for the showing they run anywhere from 15 to 30 minutes of honest-to-god commercials straight from your TV set. John Meissen jmeissen@aracnet.com John Meissen john@meissen.org Think Logically / Act Intelligently / Question Authority ------------------------------ From: goyalmanuj@gmail.com (Aujoe Partnership) Subject: Re: Inexepnsive Remote Forwarding by Auto Attendant Over Vonage Date: 16 Nov 2004 12:19:27 -0800 Organization: http://groups.google.com Vish, I don't know what you mean by 'inexpensive'. But if you are looking at spending about $10-30/per month; there is a better solution for you at www.aujoe.com It greets your callers in your name; transfers the calls to multiple parties and takes messages if they can't take the calls themselves. ------------------------------ From: kludge@panix.com (Scott Dorsey) Subject: Re: Wired News: American Passports to Get Chipped Date: 16 Nov 2004 14:57:14 -0500 Organization: Former users of Netcom shell (1989-2000) Marcus Didius Falco wrote: > New U.S. passports will soon be read remotely at borders around the > world, thanks to embedded chips that will broadcast on command an > individual's name, address and digital photo to a computerized reader. > The State Department hopes the addition of the chips, which employ > radio frequency identification, or RFID, technology, will make > passports more secure and harder to forge, according to spokeswoman > Kelly Shannon. Great idea! Now the bad guys can build bombs that explode when they detect nearby American passports! It's just the thing to ensure Americans' safety abroad. --scott "C'est un Nagra. C'est suisse, et tres, tres precis." ------------------------------ From: DevilsPGD Subject: Re: Vonage Tech Support Dead? Date: Tue, 16 Nov 2004 17:05:44 -0700 Organization: Posted via Supernews, http://www.supernews.com In message no_email_address@hotmail.com (Sara Garland) wrote: > I got an automated ticket # by email immediately, but no human yet. Let me know if you get a human ... I know what "Cheese" is, and I know what "Whiz" is... ------------------------------ From: DevilsPGD Subject: Re: Satellite Receiver Calling Out Over VOIP? Date: Tue, 16 Nov 2004 17:05:44 -0700 Organization: Posted via Supernews, http://www.supernews.com In message Hemant Shah wrote: > I am considering gettting VOIP service at home (probably Vonage), I > also have 2 dish network receivers (one is a DVR) at home and they > are connected to a land line. Dish network said that I have to have > the receivers connected to the phone line, otherwise I have to pay > extra per month per receiver (I think it is $5 per month per > receiver). > Will the satellite receiver be able to dial out over VOIP? Probably yes, as long as you have Vonage configured to use it's highest quality. Try adding *99 as a dialing string if your run into problems. I'm running BEV (Bell ExpressVu) here, which uses the same gear as Dish, and my receivers all dial in without difficulty. I know what "Cheese" is, and I know what "Whiz" is... ------------------------------ Date: Tue, 16 Nov 2004 16:50:22 PST From: Lisa Minter Subject: Last Laugh! The Parrot A young man named John received a parrot as A gift. The parrot had a bad attitude and an even worse vocabulary. Every word out of the bird's mouth was rude, obnoxious and laced with profanity. John tried and tried to change the bird's attitude by consistently saying only polite words, playing soft music and anything else he could think of to "clean up" the bird's Vocabulary. Finally, John was fed up and he yelled at the parrot. The parrot yelled back. John shook the parrot and the parrot got angrier and even ruder. John, in desperation, threw up his hand, grabbed the bird and put him in the freezer. For a few minutes the parrot squawked and kicked and screamed. Then suddenly there was total quiet. Not a peep was heard for over a minute. Fearing that he'd hurt the parrot, John quickly opened the door to the freezer. The parrot calmly stepped out onto John's outstretched arms and said "I believe I may have offended you with my rude language and actions. I'm sincerely remorseful for my inappropriate transgressions and I fully intend to do everything I can to correct my rude and unforgivable behavior." John was stunned at the change in the bird's attitude. As he was about to ask the parrot what had made such a dramatic change in his behavior, the bird continued, "May I ask what the turkey did to cause what happened to him?" HAPPY THANKSGIVING! ------------------------------ TELECOM Digest is an electronic journal devoted mostly but not exclusively to telecommunications topics. It is circulated anywhere there is email, in addition to various telecom forums on a variety of networks such as Compuserve and America On Line, Yahoo Groups, and other forums. It is also gatewayed to Usenet where it appears as the moderated newsgroup 'comp.dcom.telecom'. TELECOM Digest is a not-for-profit, mostly non-commercial educational service offered to the Internet by Patrick Townson. All the contents of the Digest are compilation-copyrighted. You may reprint articles in some other media on an occasional basis, but please attribute my work and that of the original author. Contact information: Patrick Townson/TELECOM Digest Post Office Box 50 Independence, KS 67301 Phone: 620-402-0134 Fax 1: 775-255-9970 Fax 2: 530-309-7234 Fax 3: 208-692-5145 Email: editor@telecom-digest.org Subscribe: telecom-subscribe@telecom-digest.org Unsubscribe:telecom-unsubscribe@telecom-digest.org This Digest is the oldest continuing e-journal about telecomm- unications on the Internet, having been founded in August, 1981 and published continuously since then. Our archives are available for your review/research. We believe we are the oldest e-zine/mailing list on the internet in any category! URL information: http://telecom-digest.org Anonymous FTP: mirror.lcs.mit.edu/telecom-archives/archives/ (or use our mirror site: ftp.epix.net/pub/telecom-archives) Email <==> FTP: telecom-archives@telecom-digest.org Send a simple, one line note to that automated address for a help file on how to use the automatic retrieval system for archives files. You can get desired files in email. ************************************************************************* * TELECOM Digest is partially funded by a grant from * * Judith Oppenheimer, President of ICB Inc. and purveyor of accurate * * 800 & Dot Com News, Intelligence, Analysis, and Consulting. * * http://ICBTollFree.com, http://1800TheExpert.com * * Views expressed herein should not be construed as representing * * views of Judith Oppenheimer or ICB Inc. * ************************************************************************* ICB Toll Free News. Contact information is not sold, rented or leased. One click a day feeds a person a meal. Go to http://www.thehungersite.com Copyright 2004 ICB, Inc. and TELECOM Digest. All rights reserved. Our attorney is Bill Levant, of Blue Bell, PA. ************************ DIRECTORY ASSISTANCE JUST 65 CENTS ONE OR TWO INQUIRIES CHARGED TO YOUR CREDIT CARD! REAL TIME, UP TO DATE! SPONSORED BY TELECOM DIGEST AND EASY411.COM SIGN UP AT http://www.easy411.com/telecomdigest ! ************************ --------------------------------------------------------------- Finally, the Digest is funded by gifts from generous readers such as yourself who provide funding in amounts deemed appropriate. Your help is important and appreciated. A suggested donation of fifty dollars per year per reader is considered appropriate. See our address above. Please make at least a single donation to cover the cost of processing your name to the mailing list. All opinions expressed herein are deemed to be those of the author. Any organizations listed are for identification purposes only and messages should not be considered any official expression by the organization. End of TELECOM Digest V23 #551 ****************************** From editor@telecom-digest.org Wed Nov 17 20:17:23 2004 Received: (from ptownson@localhost) by massis.lcs.mit.edu (8.11.6p3/8.11.6) id iAI1HMW02057; Wed, 17 Nov 2004 20:17:23 -0500 (EST) Date: Wed, 17 Nov 2004 20:17:23 -0500 (EST) From: editor@telecom-digest.org Message-Id: <200411180117.iAI1HMW02057@massis.lcs.mit.edu> X-Authentication-Warning: massis.lcs.mit.edu: ptownson set sender to editor@telecom-digest.org using -f To: ptownson Approved: patsnewlist Subject: TELECOM Digest V23 #552 TELECOM Digest Wed, 17 Nov 2004 20:17:00 EST Volume 23 : Issue 552 Inside This Issue: Editor: Patrick A. Townson Film Trade Group Files Anti-Piracy Suits (Monty Solomon) Bank of America: Aiming Higher (Monty Solomon) The Drive's on For Digital Radio (Monty Solomon) In Texas, 28,000 Students Test an Electronic Eye (Monty Solomon) Anti-Spam Measures Block Free Speech (Monty Solomon) Motorola Further Expands Global Support for MediaCipher (Monty Solomon) SBC to Announce TV Deal With Microsoft (Telecom dailyLead From USTA) VMWI Questions About SDT and FSK (Bryan Apple) SBC Plans to Roll Out Internet Phone Service in 2005 (Lisa Minter) Andy Abramson: SBC Seems to Be Hedging (Lisa Minter) Somewhat Off Topic But a Must Read (Jack Decker) Email Read in Automated Phone Call? (Karim T) Soyo IP Phone (nightsurfer) All contents here are copyrighted by Patrick Townson and the individual writers/correspondents. Articles may be used in other journals or newsgroups, provided the writer's name and the Digest are included in the fair use quote. By using -any name or email address- included herein for -any- reason other than responding to an article herein, you agree to pay a hundred dollars to the recipients of the email. =========================== Addresses herein are not to be added to any mailing list, nor to be sold or given away without explicit written consent. Chain letters, viruses, porn, spam, and miscellaneous junk are definitely unwelcome. We must fight spam for the same reason we fight crime: not because we are naive enough to believe that we will ever stamp it out, but because we do not want the kind of world that results when no one stands against crime. Geoffrey Welsh =========================== See the bottom of this issue for subscription and archive details and the name of our lawyer; other stuff of interest. ---------------------------------------------------------------------- Date: Tue, 16 Nov 2004 21:53:43 -0500 From: Monty Solomon Subject: Film Trade Group Files Anti-Piracy Suits By GARY GENTILE AP Business Writer LOS ANGELES (AP) -- A trade group representing seven major movie studios filed a first wave of lawsuits against individuals they say are offering pirated copies of films using Internet-based peer-to-peer file-sharing programs. As part of a larger effort to combat piracy, The Motion Picture Association of America also said it would soon make available a computer program that sniffs out movie and music files on a user's computer as well as any installed file-sharing programs. The MPAA announced the federal court suits Tuesday, but did not say how many defendants were sued or where the lawsuits were filed. The group also did not immediately make available a copy of the complaint. One lawsuit, obtained by The Associated Press, targets 18 individuals and was filed in the U.S. District Court for the Eastern District of Missouri in St. Louis. Other lawsuits are believed to have been filed in New York, Philadelphia and other areas with large concentrations of high-speed Internet customers. Such connections are required to download the massive movie files. - http://finance.lycos.com/home/news/story.asp?story=45063818 ------------------------------ Date: Tue, 16 Nov 2004 22:41:06 -0500 From: Monty Solomon Subject: Bank of America: Aiming Higher By Mel Duvall Bank of America spent $47 billion to acquire FleetBoston to get a stout presence in New England and New York. The bank will spend tens of millions to convert its 1,500 branches onto its Model Bank platform, so it can provide the same services nationwide. But previous conversions have not gone well. Can it really become a bank of all America? http://www.baselinemag.com/article2/0,1397,1720795,00.asp ------------------------------ Date: Tue, 16 Nov 2004 23:38:21 -0500 From: Monty Solomon Subject: The Drive's on For Digital Radio By Bill Griffith | November 14, 2004 Outside of replacing tubes with transistors, it's the first major improvement in radio as we know it in 80 years. High-definition radio is a technology that sneaked up on us. But it's about to go mainstream. An HD radio broadcast offers CD-quality sound on the FM band and brings FM stereo-quality sound to the AM band. But the programming is exactly what we're used to getting for free, with commercials paying the freight. At WBZ in Boston, where the broadcast end of the technology has been up and running for a year, engineering manager Mark Manuelian said the sound quality is remarkable. http://www.boston.com/cars/articles/2004/11/14/the_drives_on_for_digital_radio/ ------------------------------ Date: Wed, 17 Nov 2004 00:45:40 -0500 From: Monty Solomon Subject: In Texas, 28,000 Students Test an Electronic Eye By MATT RICHTEL SPRING, Tex. - In front of her gated apartment complex, Courtney Payne, a 9-year-old fourth grader with dark hair pulled tightly into a ponytail, exits a yellow school bus. Moments later, her movement is observed by Alan Bragg, the local police chief, standing in a windowless control room more than a mile away. Chief Bragg is not using video surveillance. Rather, he watches an icon on a computer screen. The icon marks the spot on a map where Courtney got off the bus, and, on a larger level, it represents the latest in the convergence of technology and student security. Hoping to prevent the loss of a child through kidnapping or more innocent circumstances, a few schools have begun monitoring student arrivals and departures using technology similar to that used to track livestock and pallets of retail shipments. Here in a growing middle- and working-class suburb just north of Houston, the effort is undergoing its most ambitious test. The Spring Independent School District is equipping 28,000 students with ID badges containing computer chips that are read when the students get on and off school buses. The information is fed automatically by wireless phone to the police and school administrators. In a variation on the concept, a Phoenix school district in November is starting a project using fingerprint technology to track when and where students get on and off buses. Last year, a charter school in Buffalo began automating attendance counts with computerized ID badges -- one of the earliest examples of what educators said could become a widespread trend. http://www.nytimes.com/2004/11/17/technology/17tag.html ------------------------------ Date: Wed, 17 Nov 2004 00:51:36 -0500 From: Monty Solomon Subject: EFF: Anti-Spam Measures Block Free Speech EFF White Paper Reports on Collateral Damage to Free Expression in the Fight Against Spam San Francisco - Today the Electronic Frontier Foundation (EFF) released a white paper (HTML - PDF) describing the effects of anti-spam technologies on free speech. "Noncommercial Email Lists: Collateral Damage in the Fight Against Spam" focuses on how groups running noncommercial email lists are being harmed by anti-spam techniques. The paper grew out of EFF's efforts to help MoveOn.org, human rights groups, parents' groups, and others, deliver email messages in the face of barriers that are aimed at stopping spam but that also stop wanted messages. = http://eff.org/news/archives/2004_11.php#002097 = http://www.eff.org/wp/?f=SpamCollateralDamage.html = http://www.eff.org/wp/SpamCollateralDamage.pdf ------------------------------ Date: Wed, 17 Nov 2004 01:46:14 -0500 From: Monty Solomon Subject: Motorola Further Expands Global Support for MediaCipher Technology, Announces First Chinese License Agreement with DVN Technology Limited The Agreement Enables DVN to Deploy Digital Cable Set-Tops Using the Motorola Conditional Access Technology BEIJING, Nov. 17 /PRNewswire-FirstCall/ -- Motorola, Inc. (NYSE:MOT) today announced the signing of a MediaCipher(R) license agreement with DVN Technology Limited, an affiliate of DVN (Holdings) Limited ("DVN", HKSE stock code: 0500), China's leading technology services provider of state-of-the-art digital TV broadcast platforms. The agreement will allow DVN to expand its customer base by creating new opportunities with network operators that support the Motorola MediaCipher conditional access technology. By licensing its MediaCipher technology to DVN, Motorola is providing a new opportunity for network operators to deploy advanced digital set-tops with a secure conditional access system in China -- using either an embedded or the SmartCard version of the MediaCipher technology. This greater choice in set-top selection will expand opportunities available for consumers to experience digital video in their homes. Currently deployed in more than two thousand headends worldwide, Motorola's MediaCipher technology is one of the industry's most robust and secure conditional access technologies. - http://finance.lycos.com/home/news/story.asp?story=45065804 ------------------------------ Date: Wed, 17 Nov 2004 13:51:28 EST From: Telecom dailyLead From USTA Subject: SBC to Announce TV Deal With Microsoft Telecom dailyLead from USTA November 17, 2004 http://www.dailylead.com/latestIssue.jsp?i=17564&l=2017006 TODAY'S HEADLINES NEWS OF THE DAY * SBC to announce TV deal with Microsoft BUSINESS & INDUSTRY WATCH * Motorola to acquire MeshNetworks * Private equity firms make preliminary offer for Grupo Auna * Verizon considers relocation * Inside pole-climbing school USTA SPOTLIGHT * USTA Webinar: Phone Facts & Telecom Trends, The 2005 Roadmap! EMERGING TECHNOLOGIES * Verizon Wireless offers "ring-back" tones REGULATORY & LEGISLATIVE * Bush renominates Adelstein * Film studios sue alleged Internet movie swappers http://www.dailylead.com/latestIssue.jsp?i=17564&l=2017006 http://www.dailylead.com/usta/usta_passiton.jsp Legal and Privacy information at http://www.dailylead.com/about/privacy_legal.jsp SmartBrief, Inc. 1100 H ST NW, Suite 1000 Washington, DC 20005 ------------------------------ From: bha@offsite.com (Bryan Apple) Subject: VMWI Questions About SDT and FSK Date: 17 Nov 2004 10:57:36 -0800 Organization: http://groups.google.com I have some questions about the proper implementation for VMWI. Specifically, I have CallVantage VOIP with a DLINK DVG-1120M, but I think this issue is somewhat generic. I have posted some messages on the VOIP forum at DSLreports.com, but they don't seem to be a very technical bunch over there. Maybe this group has some old-time telco folks that know how things are supposed to work! In my VOIP environment there are 3 parts to this. The VOIP provider also offers VoiceMail, and they send status messages to my TA (telephone adapter) to control the VMWI and SDT. The DLINK TA provides the FXS interface to my phone, and it generates the FSK and SDT based on the status as provided my the VOIP provider. Effectively it acts as the CO or PBX. Finally, the phone must detect the SDT or FSK and turn on/off the VMWI indicator. I realize that different phones may do this somewhat differently. I believe that phones will only go off-hook on their own to check for SDT under two circumstances: 1) after a call has been completed; 2) after an un-answered ring. But with FSK I would think the signaling could be PUSHED down the phone line at any time (as long as the line is idle). My problem is that my DLINK TA will only send the FSK to set/clear the VMWI after the phone has gone through an off-hook->idle cycle. Of course that would be the same requirement needed to detect SDT, so it seems to me they have not implemented FSK very well. This becomes especially problematic when you can change the status remotely - by dialing into VM from another phone, or accessing via the web, listening to VM, which then sends the status change to the TA, but the TA fails to pass that information along via an FSK signal. This seems wrong to me. Do I have an accurate understanding of SDT and FSK signaling for VMWI? Can anybody tell me if other implementations send FSK signaling independent of a SDT detection event? What do Telcos that offer VM do? What about PBX's? What about other VOIP adapters? Details of a little test I performed: 1) Call comes in to CallVantage, they notify the TA with CRCX (hd), TA says OK; 2) No answer, DLCX, TA says OK, RQNT(hd), TA says OK; 3) Caller leaves message and CallVantage notifies TA with RQNT S=vmwi(+), not sure why but they send this again, TA says OK; 4) I waited for at least 5 min, the TA never put the FSK signal on the local line to turn on the VMWI; 5) I pick up the local phone, hear the SDT, after hanging up the FSK signal is put on the line; 6) TA sends NTFY, they say OK, they say RQNT, TA says OK, they say MDCX with S=mwi, TA says OK; Same after the VM has been cleared (I deleted it via the web interface); 7) CallVantage sends RQNT S=vmwi(-), TA says OK; 8) I wait at least 5 min, the TA never put the FSK signal on the local line to turn off the VMWI; 9) I pick up the phone, SDT is gone, after hanging up the FSK signal is put on the line. bha ------------------------------ From: Lisa Minter Date: Wed, 17 Nov 2004 12:17:39 -0500 Subject: SBC Plans to Roll Out Internet Phone Service in 2005 http://www.chicagotribune.com/business/chi-0411170321nov17,1,4327377.story?coll=chi-business-hed By Rob Kaiser, [Chicago] Tribune staff reporter. Bloomberg News contributed to this report Responding to competitive threats to its core business, SBC Communications Inc. said Tuesday it will begin offering Internet-based phone service early next year. The service, which would only be available to the company's DSL customers, comes as rival carriers Verizon, AT&T and newcomers like Vonage roll out similar services known as VoIP, for voice over Internet protocol. "We understand that IP is the future," SBC Chief Executive Edward Whitacre said Tuesday at an industry conference in New York. By offering Internet phone service, SBC hopes to keep competitors from poaching its customers with lower prices and new features such as the ability to block calls, receive voice mails as e-mails and set call forwarding instructions from any Web connection. SBC said Tuesday it will offer the service in the 13 states it serves, including Illinois. The company, which already offers Internet phone service to businesses, is running trials for residential service in Chicago, Los Angeles, Dallas and San Antonio. It did not disclose how much its service will cost, although rivals charge between $20 and $40 a month for unlimited local and long-distance calls. [Comment: SBC is still thinking like a big phone company. Why only offer the service to their own DSL customers? That's just giving business away to other companies that have more ubiquitous coverage.] Full story at: http://www.chicagotribune.com/business/chi-0411170321nov17,1,4327377.story?coll=chi-business-hed ------------------------------ From: Lisa Minter Date: Wed, 17 Nov 2004 12:39:49 -0500 Subject: Andy Abramson: SBC Seems to Be Hedging This is from Andy Abramson's blog, at: http://andyabramson.blogs.com/voipwatch/2004/11/sbc_seems_to_be.html In what is clearly meant to be both a hedge against losing money to VoIP competitors by slowing them down by charging them more, SBC has also at the same time made a move that could potentially make their VoIP service less costly. In a tariff filing today, SBC wants to charge ISP's more if they terminate calls on their network according to a report from The Wall Street Journal. http://online.wsj.com/article/0,,SB110065122384576170-search,00.html?collection=wsjie%2F30day&vql_string=sbc%3Cin%3E%28article%2Dbody%29 (Subscription Required) Sadly, this is so typical from a company that seeks total control and ownership of the pipe and the customer and which sees their competition not being the other telcos and next generation VoIP providers, but also the cable MSOs. Yesterday I called all this an arms race. Now it's turning into economic warfare as well. Smartly, FCC Chairman Michael Powell has already announced he's looking into this. Don't also be surprised if this is also bargaining chip by SBC to establish some preferred provider relationships with ISP's and MSO's to get more of the data traffic as well as voice calls moving over their networks. While Level 3, MCI, Qwest, Broadwing and AT&T have significant if not the most traffic, SBC has also built out their own IP network, and that's a network that needs filling up. It would not be out of the realm of possbility that companies working with SBC get some sort of incentives and all this is a rouse to get them there ... In the meantime it's important that all of the VOIP companies and the ISP's band together to work to stop what is meant to be clearly another square on SBC's Monopoly Board game. ------------------------------ From: Jack Decker Date: Tue, 16 Nov 2004 22:55:47 -0500 Subject: Somewhat Off Topic But a Must Read Folks, You need to read this article: http://wired.com/news/politics/0,1283,65704,00.html?tw=wn_tophead_2 Issues related to TiVO and file sharing networks aside, please note that if "fair use" is ever legislated out of existence, many of the web pages and news sources you depend on will disappear, including much of the content of this mailing list. As you know, I often post excerpts from an article to permit you to decide if the entire article is worth reading, or to highlight one or two important points made in the article. If "fair use" ceases to exist, I might or might not be allowed to post links to the articles but I wouldn't be able to quote any portion of the articles, so I probably wouldn't bother at all. You should be very concerned when your elected representatives attempt to take away any of the rights you currently enjoy, but especially when it is done solely to benefit large mega-corporations who already feel they somehow deserve part of every paycheck you receive. For many years I have been opposed to the practices of telephone monopolies but it appears that congress may be about to create a new privileged class of corporations, namely those large enough to buy politicians (which are now apparently acting as mere puppets for these industries - not all of them, but if enough do it then the big corporations get their way, and we lose even more of our rights and freedoms). In addition to the article I linked to above, there is commentary on BroadbandReports.com here: http://www.broadbandreports.com/shownews/56780 On a somewhat personal note, I actually wonder why I still bother doing things like this (posting news to these groups) sometimes -- in a way I feel like we are all arranging the deck chairs on the Titanic. Of course I hope I am wrong, and if I didn't have that hope I would have probably stopped doing this months ago. And if I told you why I would believe something like that, some of you would question my sanity and others (those who DON'T believe everything they hear on ABC, CBS, NBC, CNN and FOX) might wonder why it took me so long to wake up. But since this isn't a political or social forum, I'll stop there and say no more. How to Distribute VoIP Throughout a Home: http://michigantelephone.mi.org/distribute.html If you live in Michigan, subscribe to the MI-Telecom group: http://groups.yahoo.com/group/MI-Telecom/ ------------------------------ From: karimatmariano@yahoo.com (Karim T) Subject: Email Read in Automated Phone Call? Date: 16 Nov 2004 21:42:24 -0800 Organization: http://groups.google.com Does the following technology exist: When someone sends an email to me, I want to receive a phone call which reads out the content of the email. Thanks guys! Karim T [TELECOM Digest Editor's Note: If you are a subscriber to America On Line, they offer a feature which allows you to use the phone to receive email by listening to it. PAT] ------------------------------ From: stevem@soyousa.com (nightsurfer) Subject: Soyo IP Phone Date: 16 Nov 2004 16:36:52 -0800 Organization: http://groups.google.com Z-Connect Telephone: The only VoIP telephone solution with zero monthly fees and 150 ready-to-use FREE minutes! Start saving money now on local, long-distance and international calls with SOYO's Z-Connect VoIP telephone. Simply plug the Z-Connect phone into your high-speed DSL or cable modem connection for instant broadband capabilities, with zero monthly fees, zero set-up fees, zero service contracts, zero software configuration and zero hidden charges. No computer or adapter is necessary, and the first 150 minutes of airtime are free. Peer-to-peer calling is always free, and extremely low rates are offered for local, long-distance and international calls. shop.soyousa.com ------------------------------ TELECOM Digest is an electronic journal devoted mostly but not exclusively to telecommunications topics. It is circulated anywhere there is email, in addition to various telecom forums on a variety of networks such as Compuserve and America On Line, Yahoo Groups, and other forums. It is also gatewayed to Usenet where it appears as the moderated newsgroup 'comp.dcom.telecom'. TELECOM Digest is a not-for-profit, mostly non-commercial educational service offered to the Internet by Patrick Townson. All the contents of the Digest are compilation-copyrighted. You may reprint articles in some other media on an occasional basis, but please attribute my work and that of the original author. Contact information: Patrick Townson/TELECOM Digest Post Office Box 50 Independence, KS 67301 Phone: 620-402-0134 Fax 1: 775-255-9970 Fax 2: 530-309-7234 Fax 3: 208-692-5145 Email: editor@telecom-digest.org Subscribe: telecom-subscribe@telecom-digest.org Unsubscribe:telecom-unsubscribe@telecom-digest.org This Digest is the oldest continuing e-journal about telecomm- unications on the Internet, having been founded in August, 1981 and published continuously since then. Our archives are available for your review/research. We believe we are the oldest e-zine/mailing list on the internet in any category! URL information: http://telecom-digest.org Anonymous FTP: mirror.lcs.mit.edu/telecom-archives/archives/ (or use our mirror site: ftp.epix.net/pub/telecom-archives) Email <==> FTP: telecom-archives@telecom-digest.org Send a simple, one line note to that automated address for a help file on how to use the automatic retrieval system for archives files. You can get desired files in email. ************************************************************************* * TELECOM Digest is partially funded by a grant from * * Judith Oppenheimer, President of ICB Inc. and purveyor of accurate * * 800 & Dot Com News, Intelligence, Analysis, and Consulting. * * http://ICBTollFree.com, http://1800TheExpert.com * * Views expressed herein should not be construed as representing * * views of Judith Oppenheimer or ICB Inc. * ************************************************************************* ICB Toll Free News. Contact information is not sold, rented or leased. One click a day feeds a person a meal. Go to http://www.thehungersite.com Copyright 2004 ICB, Inc. and TELECOM Digest. All rights reserved. Our attorney is Bill Levant, of Blue Bell, PA. ************************ DIRECTORY ASSISTANCE JUST 65 CENTS ONE OR TWO INQUIRIES CHARGED TO YOUR CREDIT CARD! REAL TIME, UP TO DATE! SPONSORED BY TELECOM DIGEST AND EASY411.COM SIGN UP AT http://www.easy411.com/telecomdigest ! ************************ --------------------------------------------------------------- Finally, the Digest is funded by gifts from generous readers such as yourself who provide funding in amounts deemed appropriate. Your help is important and appreciated. A suggested donation of fifty dollars per year per reader is considered appropriate. See our address above. Please make at least a single donation to cover the cost of processing your name to the mailing list. All opinions expressed herein are deemed to be those of the author. Any organizations listed are for identification purposes only and messages should not be considered any official expression by the organization. End of TELECOM Digest V23 #552 ****************************** From editor@telecom-digest.org Wed Nov 17 21:47:32 2004 Received: (from ptownson@localhost) by massis.lcs.mit.edu (8.11.6p3/8.11.6) id iAI2lV803060; Wed, 17 Nov 2004 21:47:32 -0500 (EST) Date: Wed, 17 Nov 2004 21:47:32 -0500 (EST) From: editor@telecom-digest.org Message-Id: <200411180247.iAI2lV803060@massis.lcs.mit.edu> X-Authentication-Warning: massis.lcs.mit.edu: ptownson set sender to editor@telecom-digest.org using -f To: ptownson Approved: patsnewlist Subject: TELECOM Digest V23 #553 TELECOM Digest Wed, 17 Nov 2004 21:47:00 EST Volume 23 : Issue 553 Inside This Issue: Editor: Patrick A. Townson Texas Officials Wary of Plan to Hunt by Internet (Lisa Minter) Movie Studios Start Suing Web File Swappers (Lisa Minter) Congress May Act on Internet Piracy Bill (Lisa Minter) Telecom Shows Sparkles Of Life (Marcus Didius Falco) Verizon and Sprint to Cut Fee For Cell Phone (Marcus Didius Falco) Smart ID Cards Track Students (Lisa Hancock) Re: Trial Shows How Spammers Operate (Dan Lanciani) Re: SBC to Announce VoIP Tests (Tony P.) Re: Vonage Tech Support Dead? (Tony P.) Re: What Wal-Mart Knows About Customers' Habits (Mark Reichert) Re: Last Laugh! Purely Spam! MY PRESENTATION TO YOU (Dan Lanciani) All contents here are copyrighted by Patrick Townson and the individual writers/correspondents. Articles may be used in other journals or newsgroups, provided the writer's name and the Digest are included in the fair use quote. By using -any name or email address- included herein for -any- reason other than responding to an article herein, you agree to pay a hundred dollars to the recipients of the email. =========================== Addresses herein are not to be added to any mailing list, nor to be sold or given away without explicit written consent. Chain letters, viruses, porn, spam, and miscellaneous junk are definitely unwelcome. We must fight spam for the same reason we fight crime: not because we are naive enough to believe that we will ever stamp it out, but because we do not want the kind of world that results when no one stands against crime. Geoffrey Welsh =========================== See the bottom of this issue for subscription and archive details and the name of our lawyer; other stuff of interest. ---------------------------------------------------------------------- From: Lisa Minter Subject: Texas Officials Wary of Plan to Hunt by Internet Date: Wed, 17 Nov 2004 00:39:18 EST HOUSTON (Reuters) - Hunters soon may be able to sit at their computers and blast away at animals on a Texas ranch via the Internet, a prospect that has state wildlife officials up in arms. A controversial Web site, http://www.live-shot.com, already offers target practice with a .22 caliber rifle and could soon let hunters shoot at deer, antelope and wild pigs, site creator John Underwood said on Tuesday. Texas officials are not quite sure what to make of Underwood's Web site, but may tweak existing laws to make sure Internet hunting does not get out of hand. "This is the first one I've seen," said Texas Parks and Wildlife Department wildlife director Mike Berger. "The current state statutes don't cover this sort of thing." Underwood, an estimator for a San Antonio, Texas auto body shop, has invested $10,000 to build a platform for a rifle and camera that can be remotely aimed on his 330-acre southwest Texas ranch by anyone on the Internet anywhere in the world. The idea came last year while viewing another Web site on which cameras posted in the wild are used to snap photos of animals. "We were looking at a beautiful white-tail buck and my friend said 'If you just had a gun for that.' A little light bulb went off in my head," he said. Internet hunting could be popular with disabled hunters unable to get out in the woods or distant hunters who cannot afford a trip to Texas, Underwood said. Berger said state law only covers "regulated animals" such as native deer and birds and cannot prevent Underwood from offering Internet hunts of "unregulated" animals such as non-native deer that many ranchers have imported and wild pigs. He has proposed a rule that will come up for public discussion in January that anyone hunting animals covered by state law must be physically on site when they shoot. Berger expressed reservations about remote control hunting, but noted that humans have always adopted new technologies to hunt. "First it was rocks and clubs, then we sharpened it and put it on a stick. Then there was the bow and arrow, black powder, smokeless power and optics," Berger said. "Maybe this is the next technological step out there." Underwood, 39, said he will offer animal hunting as soon as he gets a fast Internet connection to his remote ranch that will enable hunters to aim the rifle quickly at passing animals. He said an attendant would retrieve shot animals for the shooters, who could have the heads preserved by a taxidermist. They could also have the meat processed and shipped home, or donated to animal orphanages. *** FAIR USE NOTICE. This message contains copyrighted material the use of which has not been specifically authorized by the copyright owner. This Internet discussion group is making it available without profit to group members who have expressed a prior interest in receiving the included information in their efforts to advance the understanding of literary, educational, political, and economic issues, for non-profit research and educational purposes only. I believe that this constitutes a 'fair use' of the copyrighted material as provided for in section 107 of the U.S. Copyright Law. If you wish to use this copyrighted material for purposes of your own that go beyond 'fair use,' you must obtain permission from the copyright owner, in this instance, Reuters News Service. For more information go to: http://www.law.cornell.edu/uscode/17/107.shtml [TELECOM Digest Editor's Note: What is an 'animal orphanage' as referred to in the last paragraph of the story? I also wonder what will happen (when the man gets his high speed internet connection) if someone logs in, then manipulates the gun in such a way as to cause injury or death to another hunter. What if he did that in a wilfull way and used a bogus login to cover his tracks? PAT] ------------------------------ From: Lisa Minter Subject: Movie Studios Start Suing Web File Swappers Date: Wed, 17 Nov 2004 00:40:03 EST LOS ANGELES (Reuters) - Hollywood film studios filed suit against online video file swappers in federal courts across the United States on Tuesday, making good on a promise to punish computer users they claim are violating copyright laws. The move against people who copy and trade illegal copies of movies and TV shows is part of broad effort by the industry's chief lobbying group to stem copyright piracy it says costs studios billions of dollars annually. A Motion Picture Association of America spokesman said suits were filed across a broad spectrum of the United States, but declined to say how many. Earlier this month, when the MPAA announced it would begin filing individual "John Doe" lawsuits, the number of expected suits was widely reported to be in the hundreds. The film industry is using the "John Doe" method, identifying swappers by numerical Internet addresses, because an earlier court ruling said Internet service providers did not have to provide names of their customers. The MPAA said illegal file swapping could cost a person found guilty up to $30,000 in fines for each film. The music industry has sued more than 5,000 people in their efforts to stem illegal downloading, copying and sharing of digital music files online via peer-to-peer, or P2P, networks. The movie industry has been slower to use the courts than the music industry. Films and TV shows require huge digital files that take a long time to download, and few consumer homes have the necessary high-speed hardware. However, as more broadband cable and telephone lines are installed to households, the threat increases. Already, the MPAA claims that illegal copying of videotapes and DVDs for sale in black markets worldwide costs it more than $3.5 billion annually. *** FAIR USE NOTICE. This message contains copyrighted material the use of which has not been specifically authorized by the copyright owner. This Internet discussion group is making it available without profit to group members who have expressed a prior interest in receiving the included information in their efforts to advance the understanding of literary, educational, political, and economic issues, for non-profit research and educational purposes only. I believe that this constitutes a 'fair use' of the copyrighted material as provided for in section 107 of the U.S. Copyright Law. If you wish to use this copyrighted material for purposes of your own that go beyond 'fair use,' you must obtain permission from the copyright owner, in this instance, Reuters News Service. For more information go to: http://www.law.cornell.edu/uscode/17/107.shtml ------------------------------ From: Lisa Minter Subject: Congress May Act on Internet Piracy Bill Date: Wed, 17 Nov 2004 00:40:59 EST By David McGuire, Staff Writer The entertainment industry is pushing Congress to approve a bill that could send thousands of Internet music and movie downloaders to jail, but the legislation faces opposition from groups that say it would unfairly punish consumers. The package combines eight bills that the entertainment industry supports as part of a large-scale effort to crack down on the rampant spread of piracy on the Internet. The bill also would criminalize using a video recorder to copy films while they are still in the theater, and allow the Justice Department to file civil lawsuits against song-swappers. The bill is one of many that Congress could consider as it convenes today for a post-election lame-duck session, but sources familiar with the legislation said that it is impossible to predict whether lawmakers will act. Opponents of the bill fear that its supporters will slip it into one of the massive legislative packages that Congress often passes at the end of the year. "We take nothing for granted," said Gigi Sohn, president of Public Knowledge, a Washington, D.C.-based civil liberties group. "There's not a lot of time, but if you look away for a second, this bill can just shoot through." Public Knowledge has joined the Consumer Electronics Association, Verizon, the American Conservative Union and other groups in opposing the package, which so far has steamrolled toward passage with little opposition. Music and movie industry officials said that Congress already has shown its support for the measures in the bill. "It's not like these bills came out of nowhere. All of these bills had been passed by one house or another," said David Green, vice president for technology and new media at the Motion Picture Association of America. One of the most contentious measures in the package, the Piracy Deterrence and Education Act, won approval in the House of Representatives earlier this year. The PIRATE Act sailed through the Senate. The first bill would allow prosecutors to seek jail terms of up to five years for people who make 1,000 or more songs available for download on peer-to-peer networks such as Kazaa and eDonkey. The PIRATE Act would allow the Justice Department to seek civil damages against illegal file sharers. Under current law, the Justice Department only can prosecute criminal copyright violations. If the package became law, prosecutors no longer would have to prove that a suspect willfully distributed illegally copied files. This is a problem, opponents said, because most Internet file-sharing software is designed to automatically share the contents of people's music libraries with other members on the network. This means that people with more than a thousand songs on their computers could face jail time even if they never intended to share their music, they said. "It's really unprecedented in our copyright law to send somebody to jail unless they've done something willfully," said Sarah Deutsch, vice president and associate general counsel at Verizon Communications. "Since so many digital devices today hold thousands and thousands of songs, hundreds of thousands if not millions of people will face liability." Green said that prosecutors would still have to prove that defendants knew they were illegally sharing the files. The copyright package is almost a consolation prize for the entertainment industry, which spent much of this year urging Congress to pass the Induce Act, an attempt to drive song-swapping networks out of business by exposing them to monetary damages for inducing people to illegally share files. The Induce Act failed after a broad group of free-speech advocates, technology companies and Internet service providers complained that the measure could inadvertently target popular, legal devices like the iPod. The recording industry has seen its sales and profits plummet as the popularity of peer-to-peer file swapping has risen. Compact disc sales fell from a high of $13.2 billion in 2000 to $11.2 billion in 2003, according to the Recording Industry Association of America, which put much of the blame on an exponential increase in file sharing. CD sales bounced back in early 2004, but have not reached their previous high levels, the RIAA said. In addition to stumping for stiffer copyright laws, the recording industry has sued more than 6,000 suspected song-swappers since September 2003. The major Hollywood studios so far have avoided a similar fate, in part because it is more time-consuming to download feature-length films. Still, they are working to prevent a similar siphoning off of their profits. Earlier this month, MPAA Chairman Dan Glickman announced that the association will sue people suspected of Internet movie piracy. *** FAIR USE NOTICE. This message contains copyrighted material the use of which has not been specifically authorized by the copyright owner. This Internet discussion group is making it available without profit to group members who have expressed a prior interest in receiving the included information in their efforts to advance the understanding of literary, educational, political, and economic issues, for non-profit research and educational purposes only. I believe that this constitutes a 'fair use' of the copyrighted material as provided for in section 107 of the U.S. Copyright Law. If you wish to use this copyrighted material for purposes of your own that go beyond 'fair use,' you must obtain permission from the copyright owner, in this instance, Washington Post Company. For more information go to: http://www.law.cornell.edu/uscode/17/107.shtml ------------------------------ Date: Wed, 17 Nov 2004 00:51:28 -0500 From: Marcus Didius Falco Subject: Telecom Shows Sparkles Of Life http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/articles/A49775-2004Nov14.html http://www.washingtonpost.com/ac2/wp-dyn/A49775-2004Nov14?language=3Dprinter Wireless, Security Firms Lead Rebound By Yuki Noguchi Washington Post Staff Writer Five years ago, Cable & Wireless USA Inc. promised to link businesses through ribbons of fiber-optic cable connecting every major point on the globe. E.spire Communications Inc. vowed to build its own network from scratch to bypass the local phone giants. Corvis Corp. pledged its equipment would widen the Internet into a massive data superhighway. All were launched in the Washington area in the 1990s. All are gone today. Now, a new generation of companies -- smaller, with more modest goals -- is surfacing to take their place. Frederick's Qovia Inc. is helping business clients install and manage voice-over-Internet phone systems. Bluefire Security Technologies of Baltimore designs software to protect wireless devices from hackers. Software from Fairfax-based Nexus Innovative Systems Co. audits companies' telecommunications bills. After four years of painful decline, the area's telecommunications business is starting to come back. The newer telecom companies are largely focused on such growth areas as wireless communications and security software. Many are small. And most get by without the dollars that used to flow from venture capital funds or from going public. Washington will continue to be a major center for telecommunications, analysts and investors say. The area is rich in technologists, lawyers, venture capitalists, skilled workers and the federal regulators of the telecommunications industry. But the telecommunications industry won't be the local economic driver it was during the 1990s, analysts say. Local employment in the industry hit 50,200 in March 2001, and venture investments in local telecommunications topped $1 billion in 2000. At last report, 33,700 people were working in the local telecommunications sector as of September, according to the Bureau of Labor Statistics. The area's venture investment in telecommunications dropped to $81.7 million last year, according to data from the MoneyTree survey conducted by PricewaterhouseCoopers/Venture Economics/National Venture Capital Association. "I see promising players, but if you're looking for the next Google, I don't know that we know what that is yet for this area," said Charlie Thomas, former chief executive of Net2000 Communications and founder of investment firm Claris Capital. But, he added, some companies clearly will be driving the next generation of work because they have developed strong expertise in niches that will be important in the communications industry. Thomas singled out Reston's Nextel Communications Inc., and the District's XM Satellite Radio Holdings Inc. -- the latter not a communications company, but one with expertise in the use of satellites. It was satellite technology that launched Washington's telecommunications sector back in the 1960s, when Comsat Corp. and Intelsat Ltd. were created. Comsat was chartered in 1962 as the government's representative on Intelsat, an international satellite partnership. For decades Intelsat was the only U.S. satellite link to the rest of the world, and the effort spawned a rich pool of telecommunications experts in Washington, who went off to start or staff other companies. In 1972, William G. McGowan relocated his company, MCI Inc., to 17th Street NW in Washington, realizing a key part of MCI's success would be lobbying Congress and regulators to open long-distance calling to competition. In 1984, a court-ordered breakup of AT&T Corp.'s phone monopoly took effect, allowing MCI and others to compete head-on. The area continued to draw scrappy competitors in the 1990s. Nextel set up shop in Reston. Ciena Corp. started its business in Linthicum. But the region's true telecom boom came after the federal Telecommunications Act of 1996, which allowed new companies to compete against the regional Bell phone companies in the local phone market. The rich talent pool and proximity to the FCC attracted companies at the same time investors were willing to pour money into telecom and technology companies. "A couple of years ago, Washington D.C. was the major location nationwide, and just about every one of the competitive players were here," said Tom Koutsky, a Washington-based lawyer who has worked in the industry since 1994. In the spring of 2000, the stock market collapsed under the weight of massive overbuilding and overspending. When the market reversed course, Washington's telecom sector fared badly. One by one, familiar local names like Net2000 , Teligent Inc., PSINet Inc. and Winstar LLC, and smaller companies such as CityNet Telecommunications Inc. and Velocita Corp. shut down. The losers even included such former stalwarts as MCI and XO Communications Inc. Both weathered a trip through bankruptcy court to emerge diminished. The bankruptcies, sales and restructurings have left Washington's telecommunications industry much smaller. And if the Federal Communications Commission maintains its more hands-off approach to oversight and=20 regulation, it may reduce the incentive of telecom companies to be based in the Washington area, said Jeff Kagan, an independent industry analyst based in Atlanta. The local telecom companies that survived and those that have recently rebounded are focused -- like companies nationwide -- on the areas expected to be big sectors of growth in the coming years, including wireless technologies and phone service over the Internet. The Washington region boasts few industry-leading players in these fields but rather has numerous smaller companies trying to develop business in niches that big companies have ignored. In the wireless field, Nextel is the biggest local player, with more than 15 million customers. It is the smallest of the five national wireless carriers, but it is popular because of its "push-to-talk" walkie-talkie service. The company, with a network that was cobbled together from walkie-talkie licenses bought from taxi-cab dispatch operators, continues to develop new technologies and grow. In addition, Nextel and other telecommunications companies, like MCI, have become a breeding ground for a new generation of local entrepreneurs. "I think you've got multiple telecommunications companies in addition to Nextel, all of whom have spun off or graduated people who are able to address the shortcomings that big companies aren't nimble enough to address," said Michael Riemer, a former Nextel executive who left two years ago to work at Trust Digital in Tysons Corner. Trust Digital, which recently received $3.1 million in funding from Core Capital Partners LP, a Washington investment company, makes software to protect wireless phones from hackers and viruses. Bluefire Security is developing similar technology in Baltimore. It recently received an undisclosed amount of funding from Motorola Inc., Nextel's biggest supplier of phones. Columbia's Sourcefire Inc. sells customized software that detects potential intruders trying to break into private corporate databases. LCC International Inc. of McLean builds and maintains wireless networks. And TeleCommunication Systems Inc. of Annapolis provides instant messaging service for wireless telephones. Inphonic Inc., a Washington company, is an online reseller of wireless phones. In addition, a small cluster of WiFi companies, which offer wireless Internet connections, has appeared in the Washington area. District-based DC Access, Baltimore-based Oneder LLC, and Germantown-based RapidDSL & Wireless all offer some flavor of the service, which is aimed at giving small business or residential customers access to a high-speed wireless Internet connection without going through a traditional cable or phone company. Others cater to a narrower audience. Reston-based LinkSpot Networks Inc. offers wireless connections in RV parks around the country. Most of those are small companies that have yet to generate a profit but they say their subscriber base is growing. Another area expected to experience rapid growth is phone service over the Internet. That field is now dominated by Vonage Holdings Corp., a New Jersey company. Many of the big phone companies, including MCI, Verizon Communications Inc., and AT&T, are also moving into the Internet phone business, as are cable giants like Cox Communications Inc. and Comcast Corp. But some local companies are also making an aggressive play for this business. McLean-based Primus Telecommunications Group Inc. offers Internet phone service. Qovia sells products that monitor Internet phone systems. And Vienna's SunRocket Inc., started by former MCI executives, was recently launched to offer consumers Internet phone service. Many other companies have been carving out smaller niches. For instance, Nexus Innovative Systems, Rivermine Software and Vibrant Solutions Inc., all based in Fairfax, sell software to help businesses audit and manage their telecommunications bills. Others, like Reston-based XO Communications and Talk America Holdings Inc., sell local and long-distance service in competition with the large phone companies. MCI, even in its diminished state, continues to be a major player. One of the biggest drivers of the local telecommunications industry today is the surge in federal dollars to telecommunications firms for writing communications software and designing networks. This money has gone, not only to giant defense contractors like Northrop Grumman Corp. and Lockheed Martin Corp., but also to hundreds of smaller companies, like Apogen Technologies in McLean. "Around the [Capital] Beltway there are at least 500 companies that are doing some work with the government, doing telecom," said Thomas, of Claris Capital. That has helped cushion the blow caused by the telecom bust. As some companies, such as MCI, continue to struggle with massive losses, others like LCCI, have started to make a comeback. "If you asked me what happened to telecommunications in the area, I'd say that it's regrouping," said John Siegel, a partner at Alexandria-based Columbia Capital. "You have a lot of extremely talented people in this market. That's why I think there's an opportunity here." Copyright 2004 The Washington Post Company *** FAIR USE NOTICE. This message contains copyrighted material the use of which has not been specifically authorized by the copyright owner. This Internet discussion group is making it available without profit to group members who have expressed a prior interest in receiving the included information in their efforts to advance the understanding of literary, educational, political, and economic issues, for non-profit research and educational purposes only. I believe that this constitutes a 'fair use' of the copyrighted material as provided for in section 107 of the U.S. Copyright Law. If you wish to use this copyrighted material for purposes of your own that go beyond 'fair use,' you must obtain permission from the copyright owner, in this instance, Washington Post Company. For more information go to: http://www.law.cornell.edu/uscode/17/107.shtml ------------------------------ Date: Wed, 17 Nov 2004 00:25:47 -0500 From: Marcus Didius Falco Subject: Verizon and Sprint to Cut Fee For Cell Phone Service Note that this is effectively another cut in the price of cellular service. Sometimes they cut the price by adding minutes or adding features. This time they're cutting fees. Right now, for most carriers, the fees are $4 to $5 per month, which can be a very substantial percentage (10 to 15 per cent or even a bit more) of an average bill (under $50). http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/articles/A52986-2004Nov15.html Verizon and Sprint to Cut Fee For Transferring Cell Numbers By Yuki Noguchi Washington Post Staff Writer Verizon and Sprint wireless customers will get a small break on their bills soon. The companies have decided to eliminate or reduce a 40-cent-per-line monthly charge imposed to allow customers to transfer their phone numbers to new carriers. The small surcharge has provided the companies with tens of millions of dollars in extra monthly revenue, and Verizon Wireless and Sprint PCS Group said they don't need as much to continue offering the number transfer service. Starting with bills scheduled to go out next week, Verizon Wireless will eliminate the number transfer fee for its 42 million customers. Sprint PCS, the nation's third-largest national cellular carrier, will cut its fee to 25 cents effective this month. Sprint PCS had initially charged $1.10 for the service before a reduction to 40 cents in June. Cell phone companies charge regulatory fees to comply with various government rules requiring them to offer services such as emergency 911 calling from a wireless phone. Allowing customers to transfer their number between carriers is one of those government requirements. "In this heavily taxed industry, we do not advocate adding anything unnecessary or extraneous to our customers' monthly bill," Dennis F. Strigl, chief executive of Verizon Wireless, said in a statement. Verizon Wireless is also looking to hone its appeal to customers. "I think without a doubt it makes us more competitive, when you look at some of the fees that some of these other companies charge," said John Johnson, a spokesman for Verizon Wireless. Sprint PCS spokeswoman Lisa Ihde said the company is always evaluating its fees but not with the intention of using its fee structure as a marketing tool. The Federal Communications Commission does not set a limit on how much cell phone carriers can charge customers to cover the cost of complying with rules. Cingular Wireless, which recently acquired AT&T Wireless Services Inc., charges between 56 cents and $1.25 a month, depending on the state, to cover number transfers and 911 calling. AT&T Wireless customers will continue to pay a $1.75 monthly fee until Cingular unifies the two networks. T-Mobile USA Inc. charges its customers 86 cents for number transfer and 911 calling. Nextel Communications Inc. charges $1.55 a month to cover all of its regulatory fees. "We call on all wireless providers to reduce or eliminate these fees as well," said Janee Briesemeister, director of a cell phone consumers rights project at the Consumers Union. "We've always questioned whether the fees being charged for number portability were covering the actual costs of switching phone numbers or were simply being charged to pad profits." Copyright 2004 The Washington Post Company *** FAIR USE NOTICE. This message contains copyrighted material the use of which has not been specifically authorized by the copyright owner. This Internet discussion group is making it available without profit to group members who have expressed a prior interest in receiving the included information in their efforts to advance the understanding of literary, educational, political, and economic issues, for non-profit research and educational purposes only. I believe that this constitutes a 'fair use' of the copyrighted material as provided for in section 107 of the U.S. Copyright Law. If you wish to use this copyrighted material for purposes of your own that go beyond 'fair use,' you must obtain permission from the copyright owner, in this instance Washington Post Company. For more information go to: http://www.law.cornell.edu/uscode/17/107.shtml ------------------------------ From: hancock4@bbs.cpcn.com (Lisa Hancock) Subject: Smart ID Cards Track Students Date: 17 Nov 2004 12:45:08 -0800 Organization: http://groups.google.com The New York Times reported that a school district is using sophisticated monitoring systems to track students throughout the day. See: http://www.nytimes.com/2004/11/17/technology/17tag.html?oref=login&8hpib When I was a kid there was a little concern about abduction; we were often warned never to talk to strangers. But our parents' biggest worry seemed to be us getting hit by a car if we jumped into the street without looking. It seemed pedestrian safety lectures were the biggest item. During my first two years of high school, we had a strict student corridor patrol. You were not allowed in the halls, and those kids were brutal. During the last two years, they abolished that patrol and discovered there wasn't any problem with an honor system. If someone had to visit their locker or other business during lunch or study hall, we could do so; we were just expected to be quiet and not create any noise. It worked out very well. Most kids didn't create problems. Indeed, many past disturbances were from the corridor patrol themselves. I realize in handling large groups of people, especially in crowded space-short conditions, that rules and procedures are necessary to keep things orderly and prevent trouble. But I also think reasonable training and faith in people works well too as long as people don't try to take advtg of the system. Too many stupid petty rules aren't good. I am not too thrilled with this dawn-to-dusk ID card checking. Will a kid get detention if he happens to be in corridor "B" instead of corridor "A"? Will the cards turn into timeclocks to track lateness and absence? ------------------------------ Date: Wed, 17 Nov 2004 03:12:34 EST From: Dan Lanciani Subject: Re: Trial Shows How Spammers Operate jdj@now.here (jdj) wrote: > There is a stressed out twisted-knickers type on slashdot "suggesting" > that spam be responded to, including spam sent to bad addresses, to cost > spammers money. > It's been suggested before and was instantly squelched without > comment, except to accuse the poster of being a troll. Interesting. I didn't realize that this was considered a bad thing. My filters respond to every (seemingly) spam message with a note indicating how to bypass the filter if in fact the mail is not spam. (Actually they do this only once per sender per some months, but you get the idea.) I really can't just dump (seeming) spam in the bucket since there are a few false positives. But I get 1500+ spams per day and I can't look at them all. > Seems that spam service providers charge fees for everything, from > using their address database to send spam to charging for each hit on > the website they provide to their spamming clientele as well as > getting a cut of each sale. > It seems to follow that at least some spammers can be bankrupted if > every single item from them were to get several responses in return. > It's almost like sending back empty business-reply envelopes that come > with annoying snailmail ads. > There is an added benefit if spam to bad addresses were responded to: > the bad addresses are confirmed valid and permanently taint the > databases, which get sold around and the fun starts all over again. Because of the way my filters are integrated into sendmail they generate responses for spam sent to bad addresses. I always considered this a bug (though at least I fixed it to send only one response to envelopes with multiple bad to: addresses :) but I'm glad to hear it may do some good. I've noticed lately that spammers will make many simultaneous connections to my mail server and run through huge lists of bogus recipients. This was overwhelming my system until I added a semaphore for spamassassin use and queued most of the responses. Do they think I'm an ISP or such? > Should not be too difficult to set up a procmail script for servers to > send a few http requests to a spammer's website instead of bouncing > mail with bad addresses. Hmm. Maybe just send a SYN to each http:// address that can be extracted from the mail. Though I guess that might not count against the correct spammer if they are sharing IP addresses. Dan Lanciani ddl@danlan.*com ------------------------------ From: Tony P. Subject: Re: SBC to Announce VoIP Tests Organization: ATCC Date: Wed, 17 Nov 2004 17:21:38 -0500 In article , usta@dailylead.com says: > http://www.dailylead.com/latestIssue.jsp?i=17535&l=2017006 > TODAY'S HEADLINES > NEWS OF THE DAY > * SBC to announce VoIP tests > BUSINESS & INDUSTRY WATCH > * Adelphia Communications sets $17.5 billion minimum bid > * Report: Comcast's VoIP plans picking up steam > * Yahoo!, EarthLink beef up their anti-spam barrier > USTA SPOTLIGHT > * Order Phone Facts 2005 and Broadband Facts together and save! > EMERGING TECHNOLOGIES > * Electric companies see multiple advantages to BPL > REGULATORY & LEGISLATIVE > * Lucent faces bribery allegations > Follow the link below to read quick summaries of these stories and others. > http://www.dailylead.com/latestIssue.jsp?i=17535&l=2017006 > http://www.dailylead.com/usta/usta_passiton.jsp This is so fun watching the incumbents trip over themselves to roll out services that other upstarts already have a head start on. Circuit switched is going the way of the dodo. ------------------------------ From: Tony P. Subject: Re: Vonage Tech Support Dead? Organization: ATCC Date: Wed, 17 Nov 2004 18:22:28 -0500 In article , devilspgd@crazyhat.net says: > In message > no_email_address@hotmail.com (Sara Garland) wrote: >> I got an automated ticket # by email immediately, but no human yet. > Let me know if you get a human ... > I know what "Cheese" is, and I know what "Whiz" is... I've had no problems getting a human the two times I've had to call Vonage. But the hold times are on the high side. On my last call to them I waited for 45 minutes before getting a human being. That was my second call. The first call resulted in me cursing them and posting about it here. On the second call I spoke to someone who'd been a switch tech, granted a tandem guy but still he understood that ring voltage below 90VAC sometimes won't trigger the bells on Western Electric gear. So all is fixed -- unless my LNP request gets FUBAR I doubt I'll be calling them anytime soon. ------------------------------ From: Mark_Reichert@hotmail.com (Mark Reichert) Subject: Re: What Wal-Mart Knows About Customers' Habits Date: 17 Nov 2004 15:50:19 -0800 Organization: http://groups.google.com DevilsPGD wrote in message news:: > Walmart is consistently the cheapest on those products, for example. What will you do when, no longer able to squeeze its employees or suppliers, it starts squeezing you by lowering the quality? ------------------------------ Date: Tue, 16 Nov 2004 22:27:11 EST From: Dan Lanciani Subject: Re: Last Laugh! Purely Spam! MY PRESENTATION TO YOU Tim@Backhome.org wrote: >> The other is that if they can get your bank account and bank routing >> numbers, they will monitor your account a while and at a peak, they >> will drain it with an ACH transfer through a Nigerian bank that works >> with them (for a cut of the action). > Under federal law pertaining to electronic transactions, your bank has > no choice but to charge the electronic debit back to the originating > bank so long as you notify them on a timely basis that you did not > authorize the transfer. As a practical matter they seem to have at least one other choice: they can simply claim that the debit was in fact authorized. That's certainly the response I've received when I've inquired about ACH debits. Now in my case some of those debits were the result of check conversions that were made without prior notice. (Yes, I'm sure. Yes, I read and keep the fine print.) But my banks claim that prior notice is no longer required because of Check 21. (Yes, I know that doesn't make any sense. They also claim that Check 21 precludes their blocking ACH debits in the first place. This seems to be a fairly well-coordinated lie since I've heard it from five banks now and others have posted about similar experiences.) One debit actually showed up on a passbook savings account (I thought that was prohibited) and that (different) bank tried to argue that it must somehow have been my doing. The only thing that saved me in this case was the fact that the account was being used as an escrow with the city and required a signature from someone in the city treasurer's office (in addition to mine) for any withdrawal. When I told the bank that I hoped they would be able to come up with a signature slip with two signatures so I could show the city, they suddenly realized that there had been a "coding error". IMHO, Regulation E makes it awfully easy for an ACH debit to have been authorized and awfully hard for a consumer to prove that it was not in fact authorized. States like Massachusetts make things worse by explicitly defining an EFT transfer to be unauthorized only if the payer receives no benefit (not even qualifying "benefit" with "material"). > If the Nigerian bank won't accept the charge-back they are supposed to > be removed from the ACH. If they don't accept the charge-back your > bank has to ultimately eat the charge. Assuming that the victim does not lie to their bank (i.e., assuming they disclose that they were engaged in a plan to move money in and out of the country and that they had given their account and routing numbers to their Nigerian contact) would the bank really not be able to argue that the ACH debit was authorized? What if the Nigerian contact has a convenient tape of the phone conversation where the victim provided the numbers? (I'm sure the exact details of what was to be transferred could be edited ...) > Dan Lanciani wrote: >> I wonder who actually ends up paying in cases like these? Are there >> any posted accounts that tell whether the bank absorbed the loss? Or >> whether they were able to pull the money back? These might provide >> some ammunition to argue with banks that universally refuse to block >> ACH debits on consumer accounts (as that would be inconvenient for >> businesses) and claim that they can clean up any fraudulent withdrawals >> after the fact. > The banks love to act like innocent conduits when it comes to any issue > about ACH debits. They'd be a lot more convincing in their innocence if they allowed consumers to block ACH debits in the first place (just like businesses can) rather than making up stories about Check 21's preventing them from doing so. Or if they at least disclosed on your statement the bank & account number where your money actually went. (Two of my banks don't even provide a reference number for the transaction!) And it's not just banks. After months of "research" Fidelity finally confirmed that they allow ACH debits from any account even if it does not have a check writing feature. (Initially they had told a familiar story about Check 21's requiring them to allow ACH debits because you might have written a check on the account, but I kept reminding them that I hadn't said anything about checks.) I don't know if this is a unique situation for Fidelity, but because of the way they handle checking with their affiliated bank, the construction of a "checking account" number from a brokerage account number is fairly simple. (Prepend some digits, change some letters to numbers.) They said that it would be too expensive to maintain a flag on each account to control ACH debit access (seriously, that's what they said) and industry standards do not require them to do so in any case. Naturally they will not put any of this policy in writing. They claim that it is my responsibility to inform everyone that I do not want to debit my account to not do so. Yeah, right. > Nonetheless, with any given transaction, if the account > holder affirms on a timely basis that it's either fraud or simply not > authorized, the bank has no choice but to charge it back. > Banks hate the concept of consumers knowing that. I'll bet they do. But just to be clear: are you saying that the consumer has the unilateral right to determine that any ACH debit is unauthorized, regardless of the other circumstances? (Without asserting that he has never heard of the payee or that the payee has no claim under some legal theory, but simply that the transfer itself was unauthorized.) And that by doing so the consumer can cause his bank to permanently (not just temporarily during the investigation) return the money? I don't mean to sound overly skeptical, but if this is true than (a) a lot of people are making up stories about not being able to recover money (or at least having a great deal of trouble doing so) from, e.g., long-canceled ISP services and (b) the variation of the Nigerian scam under consideration just wouldn't work. I can buy that the Nigeran "ACH scam" is just an urban legend, but the other problems seem too frequently discussed to be total fantasy. Dan Lanciani ddl@danlan.*com ------------------------------ TELECOM Digest is an electronic journal devoted mostly but not exclusively to telecommunications topics. It is circulated anywhere there is email, in addition to various telecom forums on a variety of networks such as Compuserve and America On Line, Yahoo Groups, and other forums. It is also gatewayed to Usenet where it appears as the moderated newsgroup 'comp.dcom.telecom'. TELECOM Digest is a not-for-profit, mostly non-commercial educational service offered to the Internet by Patrick Townson. All the contents of the Digest are compilation-copyrighted. You may reprint articles in some other media on an occasional basis, but please attribute my work and that of the original author. Contact information: Patrick Townson/TELECOM Digest Post Office Box 50 Independence, KS 67301 Phone: 620-402-0134 Fax 1: 775-255-9970 Fax 2: 530-309-7234 Fax 3: 208-692-5145 Email: editor@telecom-digest.org Subscribe: telecom-subscribe@telecom-digest.org Unsubscribe:telecom-unsubscribe@telecom-digest.org This Digest is the oldest continuing e-journal about telecomm- unications on the Internet, having been founded in August, 1981 and published continuously since then. Our archives are available for your review/research. We believe we are the oldest e-zine/mailing list on the internet in any category! URL information: http://telecom-digest.org Anonymous FTP: mirror.lcs.mit.edu/telecom-archives/archives/ (or use our mirror site: ftp.epix.net/pub/telecom-archives) Email <==> FTP: telecom-archives@telecom-digest.org Send a simple, one line note to that automated address for a help file on how to use the automatic retrieval system for archives files. You can get desired files in email. ************************************************************************* * TELECOM Digest is partially funded by a grant from * * Judith Oppenheimer, President of ICB Inc. and purveyor of accurate * * 800 & Dot Com News, Intelligence, Analysis, and Consulting. * * http://ICBTollFree.com, http://1800TheExpert.com * * Views expressed herein should not be construed as representing * * views of Judith Oppenheimer or ICB Inc. * ************************************************************************* ICB Toll Free News. Contact information is not sold, rented or leased. One click a day feeds a person a meal. Go to http://www.thehungersite.com Copyright 2004 ICB, Inc. and TELECOM Digest. All rights reserved. Our attorney is Bill Levant, of Blue Bell, PA. ************************ DIRECTORY ASSISTANCE JUST 65 CENTS ONE OR TWO INQUIRIES CHARGED TO YOUR CREDIT CARD! REAL TIME, UP TO DATE! SPONSORED BY TELECOM DIGEST AND EASY411.COM SIGN UP AT http://www.easy411.com/telecomdigest ! ************************ --------------------------------------------------------------- Finally, the Digest is funded by gifts from generous readers such as yourself who provide funding in amounts deemed appropriate. Your help is important and appreciated. A suggested donation of fifty dollars per year per reader is considered appropriate. See our address above. Please make at least a single donation to cover the cost of processing your name to the mailing list. All opinions expressed herein are deemed to be those of the author. Any organizations listed are for identification purposes only and messages should not be considered any official expression by the organization. End of TELECOM Digest V23 #553 ****************************** From editor@telecom-digest.org Thu Nov 18 21:16:43 2004 Received: (from ptownson@localhost) by massis.lcs.mit.edu (8.11.6p3/8.11.6) id iAJ2Ghj14391; Thu, 18 Nov 2004 21:16:43 -0500 (EST) Date: Thu, 18 Nov 2004 21:16:43 -0500 (EST) From: editor@telecom-digest.org Message-Id: <200411190216.iAJ2Ghj14391@massis.lcs.mit.edu> X-Authentication-Warning: massis.lcs.mit.edu: ptownson set sender to editor@telecom-digest.org using -f To: ptownson Approved: patsnewlist Subject: TELECOM Digest V23 #554 TELECOM Digest Thu, 18 Nov 2004 21:16:00 EST Volume 23 : Issue 554 Inside This Issue: Editor: Patrick A. Townson SBC To File Tariff With FCC For New VoIP Service (Jack Decker) Anyone Having any Luck With Google Ads? (TELECOM Digest Editor) Telcordia to Announce Sale (Telecom dailyLead from USTA) Re: Wired News: American Passports to Get Chipped (David Clayton) Re: EFF: Anti-Spam Measures Block Free Speech (Ed Clarke) Re: EFF: Anti-Spam Measures Block Free Speech (Scott Dorsey) Re: TV Movie: Category 6 - Day of Destruction (Raymond C Martin Jr) Re: TV Movie: Category 6 - Day of Destruction (Jim Haynes) Re: What Wal-Mart Knows About Customers' Habits (Gene S. Berkowitz) Re: What Wal-Mart Knows About Customers' Habits (Scott Dorsey) Re: What Wal-Mart Knows About Customers' Habits (Lisa Hancock) Re: What Wal-Mart Knows About Customers' Habits (J Kelly) Re: What Wal-Mart Knows About Customers' Habits (DevilsPGD) Re: Email Read in Automated Phone Call? (Thomas A. Horsley) Employment Opportunity: Do you know Telco Maintenance Expert? (HotJobs) Re: Somewhat Off Topic But a Must Read (Lisa Hancock) Looking For VOIP Provider to do Business With Government (T.Sean Weintz) Re: Vonage Tech Support Dead? (DevilsPGD) All contents here are copyrighted by Patrick Townson and the individual writers/correspondents. Articles may be used in other journals or newsgroups, provided the writer's name and the Digest are included in the fair use quote. By using -any name or email address- included herein for -any- reason other than responding to an article herein, you agree to pay a hundred dollars to the recipients of the email. =========================== Addresses herein are not to be added to any mailing list, nor to be sold or given away without explicit written consent. Chain letters, viruses, porn, spam, and miscellaneous junk are definitely unwelcome. We must fight spam for the same reason we fight crime: not because we are naive enough to believe that we will ever stamp it out, but because we do not want the kind of world that results when no one stands against crime. Geoffrey Welsh =========================== See the bottom of this issue for subscription and archive details and the name of our lawyer; other stuff of interest. ---------------------------------------------------------------------- From: Lisa Minter Date: Wed, 17 Nov 2004 23:07:46 -0500 Subject: SBC To File Tariff With FCC For New VoIP Service Jack Decker notes: I have to admit, I don't really understand this at all, but it looks like it might be significant? http://informationweek.networkingpipeline.com/news/53700323 Courtesy of Advanced IP Pipeline SBC Communications Inc. is planning to introduce True IP to PSTN (TIPToP) service in the coming week by filing a tariff with the Federal Communications Commission (FCC). TIPToP service is a time division multiplexed (TDM) telecommunications service featuring switched circuit interfaces specifically designed for use by a VoIP provider to connect traffic from its IP end users to end users of the circuit-switched network. According to SBC officials, TIPToP service is not a mandatory offering but voluntary. VoIP providers who choose not to purchase TIPToP service may use other services, "to the extent permitted by existing tariffs and prevailing law, to connect traffic from their customers to the circuit-switched network," according to SBC. According to reports in the Wall Street Journal, SBC's plan will involve an increase in fees normally paid for interconnection services -- a rate increase that has reportedly drawn immediate scrutiny from the FCC. Full story at: http://informationweek.networkingpipeline.com/news/53700323 ------------------------------ Date: Thu, 18 Nov 2004 01:29:43 EST From: TELECOM Digest Editor Subject: Anyone Having any Luck With Google Ads? I just want to make a general inquiry of those of you who may be using Google Adsense on your own web sites. I have not had very good luck with it thus far. Although I have three blocks, or clusters of ads on the 'latest-issue.html' page (which is the web version of whatever the latest issue happens to be of this Digest) often times Google sends one cluster of ads for teh horizonal block or cluster on the top, but then sends nothign at all for the vertical 'towers' on the left side of the page, just leaving green colored blocks there instead. I have complained to them twice before about it, then it gets corrected for a day ro two and goes back to being green blocks. My technical advisor, Mr. Mattox, rebuilt that page totally to accomodate the (frequently non-existent) ads. Needless to say, people do not click on the green boxes, so it is wasted space and sort of leaves the page looking lopsided. My other comment is they apparently do not pay off until you get at least a hundred dollars in combination of clicks on ads and use of search box (and clicks on those ads), **then** they say they deduct their cost of running the search engine from that. I would think running the search engine should be their expense, not mine. I am sort of inclined to just get rid of all those ads and go back to the old way of doing this Digest. Any thoughts from anyone on this? Plus I do not think they are very accurate in the way the go about counting the number of impressions or 'hits' on each page. What are your experiences? PAT ------------------------------ Date: Thu, 18 Nov 2004 13:06:41 EST From: Telecom dailyLead From USTA Subject: Telcordia to Announce Sale Telecom dailyLead from USTA November 18, 2004 http://www.dailylead.com/latestIssue.jsp?i=17597&l=2017006 TODAY'S HEADLINES NEWS OF THE DAY * Telcordia to announce sale BUSINESS & INDUSTRY WATCH * SBC, Yahoo! expand partnership * Ofcom puts heat on BT * Europe's telecoms on the rise once again USTA SPOTLIGHT * Order PBX Systems for IP Telephony Today! EMERGING TECHNOLOGIES * AOL unveils new security software REGULATORY & LEGISLATIVE * Congress nears reinstating ban on Internet access tax * Qwest may settle shareholder lawsuits * Former Nortel employee knew of revenue problems Follow the link below to read quick summaries of these stories and others. http://www.dailylead.com/latestIssue.jsp?i=17597&l=2017006 Legal and Privacy information at http://www.dailylead.com/about/privacy_legal.jsp SmartBrief, Inc. 1100 H ST NW, Suite 1000 Washington, DC 20005 ------------------------------ From: David Clayton Subject: Re: Wired News: American Passports to Get Chipped Date: Thu, 18 Nov 2004 12:23:36 +1100 kludge@panix.com (Scott Dorsey) contributed the following: > Marcus Didius Falco wrote: >> New U.S. passports will soon be read remotely at borders around the >> world, thanks to embedded chips that will broadcast on command an >> individual's name, address and digital photo to a computerized reader. >> The State Department hopes the addition of the chips, which employ >> radio frequency identification, or RFID, technology, will make >> passports more secure and harder to forge, according to spokeswoman >> Kelly Shannon. > Great idea! Now the bad guys can build bombs that explode when they > detect nearby American passports! It's just the thing to ensure > Americans' safety abroad. How many seconds until someone invents a RF-shielded passport cover? Regards, David Clayton, e-mail: dcstar@XYZ.myrealbox.com Melbourne, Victoria, Australia. (Remove the "XYZ." to reply) Dilbert's words of wisdom #18: Never argue with an idiot. They drag you down to their level then beat you with experience. ------------------------------ From: Ed Clarke Subject: Re: EFF: Anti-Spam Measures Block Free Speech Date: 18 Nov 2004 02:21:50 GMT Organization: Ciliophora Associates, Inc. Reply-To: clarke@cilia.org In article , Monty Solomon wrote: > EFF White Paper Reports on Collateral Damage to Free Expression in > the Fight Against Spam > San Francisco - Today the Electronic Frontier Foundation (EFF) > released a white paper (HTML - PDF) describing the effects of > anti-spam technologies on free speech. "Noncommercial Email Lists: > Collateral Damage in the Fight Against Spam" focuses on how groups > running noncommercial email lists are being harmed by anti-spam > techniques. The paper grew out of EFF's efforts to help MoveOn.org, > human rights groups, parents' groups, and others, deliver email > messages in the face of barriers that are aimed at stopping spam but > that also stop wanted messages. This is absolutely on purpose. Collateral Damage is a necessary technique to rid the net of spammers. If you give money to a company that facilitates spamming then you are no better than a spammer. Move the damn website to an IP range owned by a company that does not spam. Let the spam supporting service providers go broke because they have no customers. You will get no sympathy from me for having your mail dropped. It is the same as if you put a show about breast cancer on a hard core XXXX rated pornography cable channel and had your message blocked by parental controls. If you don't think enough of your message to move it to a clean area, you can feel free to roll it up tight and shove it where the sun doesn't shine. Right next to your head. Hell hath no fury like a system admin who has to clean up after all the spam. And the virus attachments that turn clueless users into spam relays. There are four hundred virus infected attachments (18 different varieties of virus) and fifty one hundred spam messages in my quarantine directory right now. ------------------------------ From: kludge@panix.com (Scott Dorsey) Subject: Re: EFF: Anti-Spam Measures Block Free Speech Date: 18 Nov 2004 11:18:23 -0500 Organization: Former users of Netcom shell (1989-2000) In article , Monty Solomon wrote: >EFF White Paper Reports on Collateral Damage to Free Expression in >the Fight Against Spam > = http://eff.org/news/archives/2004_11.php#002097 > = http://www.eff.org/wp/?f=SpamCollateralDamage.html > = http://www.eff.org/wp/SpamCollateralDamage.pdf This is undoubtedly one of the worst-written discussions on this subject that I have encountered. Much as I respect the EFF, I think they really need to get someone over there that understands the issues today. Currently, there are valid and legitimate ways to run opt-in mailing lists. It's difficult. It's a lot of work. Mr. Townson can attest to how much overhead is involved and the importance of careful address confirmation. The fact that the MoveOn crew didn't want to run a list properly, the way everyone else has been doing for quite a few years now, this is the issue. This is not a free speech issue by any stretch of the imagination. --scott -- "C'est un Nagra. C'est suisse, et tres, tres precis." [TELECOM Digest Editor's Note: Actually, I gave up on trying to maintain a mailing list long ago. Part of it was my own personal head problems after the brain aneurysm, but much of it was the huge (and I am not just complaining) amount of spam and viruses coming through. Now it is handled by majordomo, and either you follow its instructions and get automatically added or deleted from the mailing list or you stay in whatever mode you were in. PAT] ------------------------------ From: famartin1@yahoo.com (Raymond C Martin Jr) Subject: Re: TV Movie: Category 6 - Day of Destruction Date: 17 Nov 2004 18:36:53 -0800 Organization: http://groups.google.com Just an FYI, the entire meteorological community is laughing hysterically at this movie ... it has no meteorological sense and the physics simply don't exist in this movie. Raymond C. Martin, Jr. Associate Meteorologist, AccuWeather Inc.- http://www.accuweather.com/ New Jersey Expressways and Tollways - http://www.njfreeways.com/ Ray's Winter Storm Archive - http://www.njfreeways.com/weather/ [TELECOM Digest Editor's Note: By the time the second and concluding part of the movie was finished Wednesday evening, I was beginning to feel the same way. I do not know if it is possible or even likely for all those conditions to merge in one place at one time or not, but even one or two of them, if severe enough, could cause a lot of havoc and problems. PAT] ------------------------------ Subject: Re: TV Movie: Category 6 - Day of Destruction Reply-To: jhaynes@alumni.uark.edu Organization: University of Arkansas Alumni From: haynes@alumni.uark.edu (Jim Haynes) Date: Thu, 18 Nov 2004 05:23:23 GMT In article , Paul A Lee wrote: > minutes, I could no longer stand the smell of the hackneyed "evil > conspiracy of huge corporations causing or taking advantage of natural > disasters to destroy humanity for their own profit" plotline. What do you suppose Enron would do in such a situation? jhhaynes at earthlink dot net ------------------------------ From: Gene S. Berkowitz Subject: Re: What Wal-Mart Knows About Customers' Habits Date: Thu, 18 Nov 2004 00:03:21 -0500 In article , Mark_Reichert@hotmail.com says: > DevilsPGD wrote in message > news:: >> Walmart is consistently the cheapest on those products, for example. > What will you do when, no longer able to squeeze its employees or > suppliers, it starts squeezing you by lowering the quality? What do you mean, "when"? Wal-Mart has for years negotiated with manufacturers to produce exclusive versions of hundreds of products in order to meet specific price and cost targets. --Gene ------------------------------ From: kludge@panix.com (Scott Dorsey) Subject: Re: What Wal-Mart Knows About Customers' Habits Date: 18 Nov 2004 11:13:16 -0500 Organization: Former users of Netcom shell (1989-2000) Mark Reichert wrote: > DevilsPGD wrote in message > news:: >> Walmart is consistently the cheapest on those products, for example. > What will you do when, no longer able to squeeze its employees or > suppliers, it starts squeezing you by lowering the quality? That's been going on for years now. And from what I can see, what consumers mostly do is put up with it. --scott "C'est un Nagra. C'est suisse, et tres, tres precis." [TELECOM Digest Editor's Note: Or many of us simply choose to do our shopping 'downtown' whenever possible. I would never claim I have never shopped at Walmart, but given a choice in the matter, I tend to go downtown (which I would pass through otherwise [living east side of Independence] before taking the cab all the way out to Walmart [which is far west side of town].) But the hair salon I go to for my haircuts is out in that area, about a block from the Walmart complex; now and again I walk across Main Street over to Walmart to look around; but not very often, and never for groceries. Sometimes a couple dollars of little items if I need them bad enough. PAT] ------------------------------ From: hancock4@bbs.cpcn.com (Lisa Hancock) Subject: Re: What Wal-Mart Knows About Customers' Habits Date: 18 Nov 2004 09:41:13 -0800 Organization: http://groups.google.com Mark_Reichert@hotmail.com (Mark Reichert) wrote: > What will you do when, no longer able to squeeze its employees or > suppliers, it starts squeezing you by lowering the quality? Shop somewhere else. The history of retailing (indeed all businesses) is filled with survivors who adapted over time and failures who didn't. There once was a hot chain of discount stores known as EJ Korvette. They prospered for a while, but then made poor business decisions and whithered away. In the supermarket world, A&P was once a major leading chain. It's still around but far from being a leader. We have a regional convenience store chain that is rooted in iron foundaries. I could go on and on with examples from industry of long-time companies that survive and prosper to this day and once prosperous industry leaders that barely exist, if at all. [TELECOM Digest Editor's Note: Maybe you read in the papers recently where K-Mart and Sears had merged, making the combined thing now the third largest retail chain. Walmart has been watching that closely. There was a K-Mart in the complex where Walmart is located; Walmart drove them out of business two years ago. On the other hand, Sears has been downtown for about fifty years, and say they plan on staying. Our very first drug store chain (first for here in s.e. Kansas at least) -- Walgreens -- is scheduled to open in about six months; downtown -- praise God! -- on the corner of 9th and Maple Streets; the house owned at one point in time by Alf Landon when he was governor of Kansas. They've been squabbling for some time over the historical significance of that house, but it now appears it is going to be moved and the corner cleared for the new Walgreen's store. PAT] ------------------------------ From: J Kelly Subject: Re: What Wal-Mart Knows About Customers' Habits Date: Thu, 18 Nov 2004 13:59:35 -0600 Organization: http://newsguy.com Reply-To: jkelly@newsguy.com On 17 Nov 2004 15:50:19 -0800, Mark_Reichert@hotmail.com (Mark Reichert) wrote: > DevilsPGD wrote in message > news:: >> Walmart is consistently the cheapest on those products, for example. > What will you do when, no longer able to squeeze its employees or > suppliers, it starts squeezing you by lowering the quality? They already have lowered the quality. ------------------------------ From: DevilsPGD Subject: Re: What Wal-Mart Knows About Customers' Habits Date: Thu, 18 Nov 2004 15:14:02 -0700 Organization: Posted via Supernews, http://www.supernews.com In message Mark_Reichert@hotmail.com (Mark Reichert) wrote: >> Walmart is consistently the cheapest on those products, for example. > What will you do when, no longer able to squeeze its employees or > suppliers, it starts squeezing you by lowering the quality? Start up a family run store for people pissed off at Walmart. A fool and his money are soon popular. [TELECOM Digest Editor's Note: We have a lot of family owned businesses downtown here, and at one point we had **four** major grocery chains here (Safeway, Country Mart, Food Town and Dillons.) Walmart managed to do them all in. The last one to go was County Mart, at 10th and Myrtle; then that property stood vacant (a huge store) for several months. Then even the Walmart haters had to go to Walmart to get their groceries. About a year and a half ago, a chain called Marvins out of Oklahoma took over the old Country Mart store, and they are hanging in there. PAT] ------------------------------ Subject: Re: Email Read in Automated Phone Call? From: tom.horsley@att.net (Thomas A. Horsley) Organization: AT&T Worldnet Date: Thu, 18 Nov 2004 23:10:53 GMT > [TELECOM Digest Editor's Note: If you are a subscriber to America > On Line, they offer a feature which allows you to use the phone to > receive email by listening to it. PAT] So does (or at least did) AT&T Worldnet (it always struck me as the stupidest technology I could imagine -- I vastly prefer email because it doesn't need you to play phone tag with it, now they want to add phone tag back to email :-). >>==>> The *Best* political site >>==+ email: Tom.Horsley@worldnet.att.net icbm: Delray Beach, FL | Free Software and Politics <<==+ ------------------------------ From: HotJobs@MicroSurvivor.com Subject: Employment Opportunity: Do You Know a Telco Maintenance Expert? Date: Thu, 18 Nov 2004 04:33:08 EST Dear Business Professional, You were referred to me by an Online Listing and I am contacting you in regard to a well-paid part-time consulting opportunity to serve as an "Expert Witness". On behalf of my client, I am looking for Technology Experts in the area of "outside plant telecommunications", with respect to aerial or buried cable comprising copper wire, coax or fiber optics, that are interested in serving as an "Expert Witnesses" for a prestigious litigation case to possibly set precedence for the industry. The scope of this project will require the ability to work on this case for up to 100 hours over the course of the next three or four weeks. Here are the details: Demonstrated at least 10-15 years of successful experience in the outside plant telecommunications industry (or related) Electrical Engineer and/or Telephone/Cable Technician. Electrical Engineer and/or Telephone/Cable Technician who has with repair methods for cut cables made of copper wire, coax or fiber optic materials. Knowledge of standard repair practices, tools used, timelines, etc. Ph.d. a plus but not a must. Testifying experience in a patent case; Excellent communications skills for written, verbal, and one-on-one persuasion The goal is to consult our client as an equal partner and evaluate the case as an expert witness. The candidates will possibly meet executive teams of well know companies, partners of law firms and other interesting people beneficial to further advancing his career. The candidate may be located anywhere in the US to fulfill this consulting agreement. Please provide quantified examples of your success, references, and your relevant experience matching the above requirements ASAP. The project start date would be immediately after selection of the consultant. If you know other experts that might also be interested in this consulting opportunity, feel free to forward this announcement, and let your friends know about it. The selection process of consultants to be interviewed will be based on the responses you provide with your reply email. The start date for the interviews will follow immediately after selection of the most appropriate consultants. We are on an urgent timeline and honor a quick response to this message. The Start date of the project is within a few days from now. Thanks again and I look forward to hearing from you. Sincerely, Jorg Huser CEO / Founder Micro Survivor, Inc. Phone +1-408-690-2464 Fax +1-408-516-9814 Email jorg@microsurvivor.com Enabling Emerging Business http://www.microsurvivor.com ------------------------------ From: hancock4@bbs.cpcn.com (Lisa Hancock) Subject: Re: Somewhat Off Topic But a Must Read Date: 18 Nov 2004 06:51:08 -0800 Organization: http://groups.google.com Jack Decker wrote: > You should be very concerned when your elected representatives attempt > to take away any of the rights you currently enjoy, but especially > when it is done solely to benefit large mega-corporations who already > feel they somehow deserve part of every paycheck you receive. Whenever a law is proposed that might benefit the business community, it seems people quickly object on the grounds it will just help megacorporations who don't need any help. But this isn't true. The business world consists of many different sized businesses. Yes there are the mega businesses, but there are also plenty of tiny and small firms. They have legitimate needs, too. In this particular issue of copyright law, I am not too thrilled about taking away "fair use" which I think greatly serves the public interest. However, it must be remembered that many copyright holders are not megacorporations, but individuals who may have written but one book or song and are fully entitled to receive the benefits of their effort. An example of bad protests is the bankruptcy issue. The bankruptcy laws were revised some years ago and made too lenient. People say those laws shouldn't be changed because otherwise the big banks would benefit. But they don't realize many small business people are also hurt by customers who file for bankruptcy and don't pay their bills. In the case of megacorporations, the solution is to break them up under anti-trust laws and not allow their formation in the first place. Wal-Mart shouldn't be allowed in the grocery business and should be limited in how many of their stores are in a given commerce zone to allow for other stores, to give one example. K-Mart and Sears should not be allowed to merge. [TELECOM Digest Editor's Note: K-Mart (remember when it used to be the 'dime store' Kresge's?) and Sears (remember when it used to be known as 'Sears and Roebuck' ?) in fact have merged. Walmart is not at all pleased about it. PAT] ------------------------------ From: T. Sean Weintz Subject: Looking For VOIP Provider That Can Do Business With Government Date: Thu, 18 Nov 2004 17:13:23 -0500 Organization: Posted via Supernews, http://www.supernews.com I work for a small government agency. I am trying to get a VOIP line that has unlimited long distance - my choices would seem to be quite varied out there. Here is the rub, however: ALL of them seem to insist on billing for federal excise tax. Under law, we cannot pay that. None of the VOIP providers I have spoken to so far (Vonage, broadvoice, p8) are willing to bend on this at all. Their billing depts tell me they are not set up to deal with tax exempt customers. Does anyone know of a VOIP line provider with an unlimited long distance plan that can accomodate us? (do not reply via email - the return address of this post goes to a spam trap account) [TELECOM Digest Editor's Note: Take your choice of them; personally I suggest Vonage. If your volume of business is of any value to them (and I think it might be), they'll figure out a way to write off the 'tax' they think is due. PAT] ------------------------------ From: DevilsPGD Subject: Re: Vonage Tech Support Dead? Date: Thu, 18 Nov 2004 15:14:03 -0700 Organization: Posted via Supernews, http://www.supernews.com In message Tony P. wrote: > I've had no problems getting a human the two times I've had to call > Vonage. But the hold times are on the high side. > On my last call to them I waited for 45 minutes before getting a human > being. I've never had problems before. I don't mind hold time, I have a good speakerphone, but this time I can't even get into the hold queue. A fool and his money are soon popular. ------------------------------ TELECOM Digest is an electronic journal devoted mostly but not exclusively to telecommunications topics. It is circulated anywhere there is email, in addition to various telecom forums on a variety of networks such as Compuserve and America On Line, Yahoo Groups, and other forums. It is also gatewayed to Usenet where it appears as the moderated newsgroup 'comp.dcom.telecom'. TELECOM Digest is a not-for-profit, mostly non-commercial educational service offered to the Internet by Patrick Townson. All the contents of the Digest are compilation-copyrighted. You may reprint articles in some other media on an occasional basis, but please attribute my work and that of the original author. Contact information: Patrick Townson/TELECOM Digest Post Office Box 50 Independence, KS 67301 Phone: 620-402-0134 Fax 1: 775-255-9970 Fax 2: 530-309-7234 Fax 3: 208-692-5145 Email: editor@telecom-digest.org Subscribe: telecom-subscribe@telecom-digest.org Unsubscribe:telecom-unsubscribe@telecom-digest.org This Digest is the oldest continuing e-journal about telecomm- unications on the Internet, having been founded in August, 1981 and published continuously since then. Our archives are available for your review/research. We believe we are the oldest e-zine/mailing list on the internet in any category! URL information: http://telecom-digest.org Anonymous FTP: mirror.lcs.mit.edu/telecom-archives/archives/ (or use our mirror site: ftp.epix.net/pub/telecom-archives) Email <==> FTP: telecom-archives@telecom-digest.org Send a simple, one line note to that automated address for a help file on how to use the automatic retrieval system for archives files. You can get desired files in email. ************************************************************************* * TELECOM Digest is partially funded by a grant from * * Judith Oppenheimer, President of ICB Inc. and purveyor of accurate * * 800 & Dot Com News, Intelligence, Analysis, and Consulting. * * http://ICBTollFree.com, http://1800TheExpert.com * * Views expressed herein should not be construed as representing * * views of Judith Oppenheimer or ICB Inc. * ************************************************************************* ICB Toll Free News. Contact information is not sold, rented or leased. One click a day feeds a person a meal. Go to http://www.thehungersite.com Copyright 2004 ICB, Inc. and TELECOM Digest. All rights reserved. Our attorney is Bill Levant, of Blue Bell, PA. ************************ DIRECTORY ASSISTANCE JUST 65 CENTS ONE OR TWO INQUIRIES CHARGED TO YOUR CREDIT CARD! REAL TIME, UP TO DATE! SPONSORED BY TELECOM DIGEST AND EASY411.COM SIGN UP AT http://www.easy411.com/telecomdigest ! ************************ --------------------------------------------------------------- Finally, the Digest is funded by gifts from generous readers such as yourself who provide funding in amounts deemed appropriate. Your help is important and appreciated. A suggested donation of fifty dollars per year per reader is considered appropriate. See our address above. Please make at least a single donation to cover the cost of processing your name to the mailing list. All opinions expressed herein are deemed to be those of the author. Any organizations listed are for identification purposes only and messages should not be considered any official expression by the organization. End of TELECOM Digest V23 #554 ****************************** From editor@telecom-digest.org Fri Nov 19 02:04:13 2004 Received: (from ptownson@localhost) by massis.lcs.mit.edu (8.11.6p3/8.11.6) id iAJ74DN16879; Fri, 19 Nov 2004 02:04:13 -0500 (EST) Date: Fri, 19 Nov 2004 02:04:13 -0500 (EST) From: editor@telecom-digest.org Message-Id: <200411190704.iAJ74DN16879@massis.lcs.mit.edu> X-Authentication-Warning: massis.lcs.mit.edu: ptownson set sender to editor@telecom-digest.org using -f To: ptownson Approved: patsnewlist Subject: TELECOM Digest V23 #555 TELECOM Digest Fri, 19 Nov 2004 02:04:00 EST Volume 23 : Issue 555 Inside This Issue: Editor: Patrick A. Townson SBC's VoIP End Run (Lisa Minter) The Bell VoIP Invasion (Lisa Minter) Re: Somewhat Off Topic But a Must Read (Jack Decker) Re: SBC to Announce TV Deal With Microsoft (Thomas A. Horsley) Phone Systems (jt) NEC IP Phone Works, One Way (Anthony) Re: What Wal-Mart Knows About Customers' Habits (NoSpamForMe) EPIC Alert 11.22 (Monty Solomon) EFFector 17.41: E-voting Forensics - What They Can/Can't Tell (Solomon) Re: EFF: Anti-Spam Measures Block Free Speech (DevilsPGD) Re: Looking for VOIP Provider (DevilsPGD) Dutch Tapping Room Not Kosher (Marcus Didius Falco) All contents here are copyrighted by Patrick Townson and the individual writers/correspondents. Articles may be used in other journals or newsgroups, provided the writer's name and the Digest are included in the fair use quote. By using -any name or email address- included herein for -any- reason other than responding to an article herein, you agree to pay a hundred dollars to the recipients of the email. =========================== Addresses herein are not to be added to any mailing list, nor to be sold or given away without explicit written consent. Chain letters, viruses, porn, spam, and miscellaneous junk are definitely unwelcome. We must fight spam for the same reason we fight crime: not because we are naive enough to believe that we will ever stamp it out, but because we do not want the kind of world that results when no one stands against crime. Geoffrey Welsh =========================== See the bottom of this issue for subscription and archive details and the name of our lawyer; other stuff of interest. ---------------------------------------------------------------------- From: Lisa Minter Date: Thu, 18 Nov 2004 12:11:14 -0500 Subject: SBC's VoIP End Run http://www.gigaom.com/2004/11/sbcs_voip_end_r.php Om Malik on Broadband Someone at SBC Communications out to be nominated for the best media strategist of the year award. What a masterful strategy! Announce VoIP plans, then to layer it thick, announce IP-TV plans, and while the whole world was gushing over SBC embracing the future, stick a knife in the back of every potential VoIP rival with a simple, relatively little know yet lethal regulation. In other words, thanks to a regulatory filing, SBC has brought to a quick end the 'lets not pay any termination fees' party that had VoIP upstarts drunk. There is shock and outrage in the blogger community. I am not a little bit surprised. My stance has been that Bells will win the VoIP sweepstakes. Now take this ruling as an example. Folks at Vonage and Sunrocket are busy building their brands and are spending their money on advertising. AT&T, MCI and Sprint are financially hobbled and are basically saying: we got no friends in Washington anyway. So where are the millions of dollars needed to spend on lobbying efforts. Think of this as a classic Silicon Valley hallucination. The techies believe innovation will change the world. Eventually -- meanwhile Washington, the soft dollars, and powerful groups control the future. Bells have what they want: no regulation and interference from pesky state officials. They have monopolistic control of the last mile of today and the future. They have near total ownership of the wireless waves. They have now basically imposed the old order on the world, and they are going to print money. Good for their share holders, too bad for venture investors. It happened with DSL, and it will happen again. Why does anyone get surprised by all this, I don't get. Listen up guys: when Bell's livelihood is threatened they firebomb the opposition. As simple as that. I am told Michael Powell is very upset about this end run by SBC. He cannot do anything much right now. So you think, it is over. Think again. Many overlooked the fact that Cisco bought a company called P-Cube recently. One of the things P-Cube can do is prioritize the traffic flows on an IP network. SBC could use it and lower the priority of the traffic coming from say Vonage or AT&T. Nothing illegal here: SBC's network and it can do pretty much what it wants on its own network. Poor quality, lags, dropped packets and soon Vonage customers could be switching to SBC VoIP: which is more expensive, has better quality and of course is highly profitable. Do I like it? No! Will I use it? Of course! Like I will have an option. You thought I was joking when I said monopoly for next 100 years. [Jack Decker Comment: I am not quite as pessimistic on this as Mr. Malik -- SBC has burned a lot of bridges in the past few years and I have some doubts that the skids are greased as well as they might like to think. But for the moment this is a matter of considerable concern, and I would certainly hope that the FCC and/or congress will do more than just some hand wringing over the matter. Also, bear in mind that if *everyone* were to move to VoIP and other non-traditional forms of telephony, then SBC's tariffs wouldn't matter much. This is certainly an issue worth watching, and hopefully we'll see some more informed analysis on it in the next few days.] ------------------------------ From: Lisa Minter Date: Thu, 18 Nov 2004 13:56:58 -0500 Subject: The Bell VoIP Invasion Reply-To: VoIPnews@yahoogroups.com http://www.broadbandreports.com/shownews/56895 Bell's done fooling around, ready for battle SBC plans to file a new tariff with the FCC that would increase the fees paid by ISP's for calls completed on the company's local-phone network, note users in our VoIP forum http://www.broadbandreports.com/forum/remark,11895120 . As some (like broadband journalist Om Malik http://www.gigaom.com/2004/11/sbcs_voip_end_r.php and Andy Abramson http://andyabramson.blogs.com/voipwatch/2004/11/sbc_seems_to_be.html> ) are predicting, this could be the beginning of an incumbent power play in a VoIP sector currently riddled with upstarts. Article plus reader comments at: http://www.broadbandreports.com/shownews/56895 ------------------------------ From: Jack Decker Date: Thu, 18 Nov 2004 14:00:17 -0500 Subject: Re: Somewhat Off Topic But a Must Read At 07:00 PM 11/17/2004 -0500, Scott V wrote: > on that 2nd link I didn't find much news on it. Do we need to > download that .pdf or what? See the line that says, "Comment Overflow - Click: 176 - Read" ? Click on the word "Read" to see the comments. Or just use this direct link: http://www.broadbandreports.com/forum/news,56780~mode=full How to Distribute VoIP Throughout a Home: http://michigantelephone.mi.org/distribute.html If you live in Michigan, subscribe to the MI-Telecom group: http://groups.yahoo.com/group/MI-Telecom/ ------------------------------ Subject: Re: SBC to Announce TV Deal With Microsoft From: tom.horsley@att.net (Thomas A. Horsley) Organization: AT&T Worldnet Date: Thu, 18 Nov 2004 23:15:36 GMT > * SBC to announce TV deal with Microsoft I see two possibilities here: 1. SBC will have the most expensive disaster ever with millions of outraged customers trying and failing to get realtime video from Microsoft powered servers. 2. Microsoft will actually be selling SBC boxes that are running a customized Linux to provide the video servers (just like they run hotmail off linux). :-). >>==>> The *Best* political site >>==+ email: Tom.Horsley@worldnet.att.net icbm: Delray Beach, FL | Free Software and Politics <<==+ ------------------------------ From: jeeptop2000@yahoo.com (jt) Subject: Phone Systems Date: 18 Nov 2004 15:05:21 -0800 Organization: http://groups.google.com We are looking to upgrade our phone system going from 15X 23 to 4 POTS lines and a T1 PRI with DID and 28 extensions. Don't know what the resources are now to research these things can someone point to a good resource online or off to compare systems? We are looking at Avaya Merlin Magix and a Nortel Business Communication Manager. Do all the systems offer the same set of features or are there some glairing differences, As always I'm sure the devil is in the details. jt ------------------------------ Date: Fri, 19 Nov 2004 02:24:43 GMT From: Anthony Subject: NEC IP Phone Works, One Way Organization: Optimum Online Hey folks, I am a bit lost, as this is my 1st go around with VoIP. I currently have a NEC Electra IPK system w/ the VoIP card, etc. I set the unit up today, and uploaded the latest firmware to the card. I took the phone to one of my satellite offices about 40 miles away from the PBX. I got the systems to connect, I can check voicemail, get an outside line, and page, however nobody can hear anything that I say, however I can hear the other end w/ the PBX absolutely fine. I've blown away the settings on both the card, and on the phone, and nothing I am doing is working. Is there something I am missing here? Is there a specific set of ports I need to open on either firewall? I have the phones set on the DMZ ip's, so all ports apparently are opened. Any help would be appreciated. Regards, Michael ------------------------------ From: NoSpamForMe Subject: Re: What Wal-Mart Knows About Customers' Habits Organization: AT&T Worldnet Date: Fri, 19 Nov 2004 03:05:10 GMT > [TELECOM Digest Editor's Note: Maybe you read in the papers > recently where K-Mart and Sears had merged, making the combined > thing now the third largest retail chain. Walmart has been watching > that closely. There was a K-Mart in the complex where Walmart is > located; Walmart drove them out of business two years ago. On the > other hand, Sears has been downtown for about fifty years, and say > they plan on staying. Our very first drug store chain (first for > here in s.e. Kansas at least) -- Walgreens -- is scheduled to open > in about six months; downtown -- praise God! -- on the corner of > 9th and Maple Streets; the house owned at one point in time by > Alf Landon when he was governor of Kansas. They've been squabbling > for some time over the historical significance of that house, but > it now appears it is going to be moved and the corner cleared for > the new Walgreen's store. PAT] Why is it OK for the a big chain like Walgreen's (or CVS, Rite-Aid, etc.) to come into a town and drive the little independent drugstores out of business ... indeed you salute them for opening a new store in your downtown ... but WalMart is a "bad guy" ? There's really no difference, other than relative scale, you know. [TELECOM Digest Editor's Note: I was not praising Goddess for *Walgreens* opening a store here so much as I was praising any business for opening in our slowly decaying, beginning to show signs of wear and tear downtown. For a few years now there has been a movement of new businesses onto West Main Street; the area over the railroad overpass going out to the Walmart complex. You are correct, there is no difference other than scale, and we had this discussion here a few weeks ago; small upstart phone companies walking all over Mother, putting her in her place ('good' was the consensus) and small down drugstores, clothing stores, appliance and furniture stores getting trounced by Walmart ('no so good' was the consensus.) Then Lisa Hancock or myself pointed out if we are to be consistent, what is good for the goose is also fine for the gander. That was the difference. I am accustomed to walking downtown (a few blocks) to do shopping; *not* go way out on West Main Steet (which I generically refer to as 'Walmart') although that area is where K-Mart used to be before they went out of business here, and where a good restaurant everyone in town likes (Eggberts) is located, and the Sonic drive in and my hair dresser and other nice places are located. Speaking of Walgreens, this decripit, brain-diseased old man actually has a good feeling for Walgreens from 40 years ago. For several months in 1963, I was employed by the fund raising committee to build a new McCormick YWCA, to replace the old, ancient one on Walton Street in Chicago. I spoke to a group of old hags who were having a luncheon meeting, and one of the guests at the luncheon was Myrtle Walgreen, mother of Charles Walgreen who in those days was the chairman of the board of Walgreens, Inc. Myrtle and her husband Charles (the first) owned and operated the *original* Walgreens at 63rd Street and Drexel Avenue in Chicago. Charles did the pharmacy counter and his wife Myrtle did the lunch counter. That was their one and only store, a little storefront kind of thing right after the start of the last century. Fifty or sixty years later, the 63rd and Drexel neighborhood had totally gone to hell; she was a *very* old lady, her husband Charles was long since deceased, her son Charles, Jr was the chairman of the board, and all the other old ladies at this very elegant hoity-toity luncheon were waiting for Myrtle to make the first move. I made my pitch for money to build the new YWCA, and when I had finished my presentation, Myrtle Walgreen stood up with her cane and hobbled up to the stage where I was standing and she said, "well, this idea of a new Young Women's Christian Association for the girls and young ladies in Chicago sounds like a good idea, so I will start it off with a 'little gift' of my own." On saying that, she reached in her purse and pulled out a check for **fifty thousand dollars** and said "here is just a small gift from my personal funds to help you." That's all it took; the other old ladies saw what Myrtle had done, and proceeded to get their own checks written out, since Myrtle had in essence approved of my speech and collection efforts. She has long since been gone of course, but I still remember the way by her actions she encouraged the older older ladies to 'help build a new YWCA for unfortunate young women and girls in our midst.' Walgreens *used to have* a soda fountain/lunch counter in every one of their stores; the two biggest Walgreens in downtown Chicago had cafeterias in the basement as well. I don't think they do that any longer at all. Myrtle said to me once the concept of a soda fountain/ lunch counter/cafeteria in every one of our stores started in 1912 when she was making lunch for her husband Charles each day; Charles had suggested "why not make sandwhiches like that and coffee each day for our customers who do business with us (at 63rd and Drexel). PAT] ------------------------------ Date: Thu, 18 Nov 2004 22:25:49 -0500 From: Monty Solomon Subject: EPIC Alert 11.22 ====================================================================== E P I C A l e r t ====================================================================== Volume 11.22 November 18, 2004 ---------------------------------------------------------------------- Published by the Electronic Privacy Information Center (EPIC) Washington, D.C. http://www.epic.org/alert/EPIC_Alert_11.22.html ====================================================================== Table of Contents ====================================================================== [1] EPIC Releases 2004 Privacy & Human Rights Report [2] Agency Orders 72 Airlines to Turn Over Passenger Information [3] EPIC Joins Coalition to Support Privacy in Email Intercept Case [4] Government Report Finds SSNs in Many State, County Records [5] FTC Proposes Major Telemarketing Loophole [6] News in Brief [7] EPIC Bookstore: Privacy & Human Rights 2004 [8] Upcoming Conferences and Events ... http://www.epic.org/alert/EPIC_Alert_11.22.html ------------------------------ Date: Thu, 18 Nov 2004 22:32:10 -0500 From: Monty Solomon Subject: EFFector 17.41: E-voting Forensics - What They Can/Can't Tell Us EFFector Vol. 17, No. 41 November 11, 2004 donna@eff.org A Publication of the Electronic Frontier Foundation ISSN 1062-9424 In the 312th Issue of EFFector: * E-voting Forensics: What They Can - And Can't - Tell Us * EFF, Nonprofits Challenge Secret Government Blacklists * StreamCast and Grokster File Supreme Court Brief * EFF Appeals Anti-Competitive BnetD Ruling * Op-ed - Dumb and Dumber: Why the Movie Industry Shouldn't Do as the Recording Industry Has Done * EFF Seeks Webmaster Who Wants to Make a Difference * MiniLinks (20): Suing 12-Year-Olds Is *So* 2003 * Administrivia ... http://www.eff.org/effector/17/41.php ------------------------------ From: DevilsPGD Subject: Re: EFF: Anti-Spam Measures Block Free Speech Date: Thu, 18 Nov 2004 22:26:33 -0700 > [TELECOM Digest Editor's Note: Actually, I gave up on trying to > maintain a mailing list long ago. Part of it was my own personal > head problems after the brain aneurysm, but much of it was the huge > (and I am not just complaining) amount of spam and viruses coming > through. Now it is handled by majordomo, and either you follow its > instructions and get automatically added or deleted from the mailing > list or you stay in whatever mode you were in. PAT] I can't speak to anyone else, but I have a lot of respect for folks that stop pandering to the lowest common denominator. I see dumb people, walking around like regular people. They don't see each other. They only see what they wanna see. They don't know they're dumb. [TELECOM Digest Editor's Note: Well, I respect your position, but I did not stop handling the mailing list just to 'get even' with dumb people or make it harder for them. I had to stop doing it in order to be able to get done here and get a few hours to myself each day. Add the mailing list onto my schedule and I would just get too tired as a result of my brain aneurysm. Physically I cannot keep up with it as I used to do when I wrote all my own scripts for that sort of thing, etc. As it is now, I am looking at a major repair job on the archives latest-issuw.html page. PAT] ------------------------------ From: DevilsPGD Subject: Re: Looking For VOIP Provider That Can Do Business With Government Date: Thu, 18 Nov 2004 22:26:33 -0700 In message T. Sean Weintz wrote: > ALL of them seem to insist on billing for federal excise tax. Under > law, we cannot pay that. None of the VOIP providers I have spoken to > so far (Vonage, broadvoice, p8) are willing to bend on this at > all. Their billing depts tell me they are not set up to deal with tax > exempt customers. Is there no way you can pay the tax and have the gov't refund it after the fact? I see dumb people, walking around like regular people. They don't see each other. They only see what they wanna see. They don't know they're dumb. ------------------------------ Date: Thu, 18 Nov 2004 22:35:08 -0500 From: Marcus Didius Falco Subject: Dutch Tapping Room Not Kosher * Original: FROM..... A Grudko Shock horror - Dutch Intel. leaking to the Israelis. http://www.fnl.nl/ct/archief2002/ct2002-12/aftappen.htm Paul Wouters, Patrick Smits According to anonymous sources within the Dutch intelligence community, all tapping equipment of the Dutch intelligence services and half the tapping equipment of the national police force, is insecure and is leaking information to Israel. How difficult is it to make a back-door in the Dutch Transport of Intercepted IP Traffic[1] system? The discussion focuses on the tapping installations for telephony and internet delivered to the government in the last few years by the Israeli company Verint[2]. This company was called Comverse-Infosys[3] until half a year ago, but was quickly renamed when the FBI started several investigations against it and arrested some of its employees in the US on suspicion of espionage. (See pulled FoxNews stories, Politech, Cryptome or Google). People within the Dutch government got worried too. Especially because they had been warned as early as 1998 about the possible back-doors in the tapping equipment. The ex-ministers of interior ("Binnenlandse Zaken"), Peper and de Vries, could not comment. The minister of Justice at the time, Korthals Altes, was asked to report to parliament in December 2001, where he stated that the security measures meet the required level and that an investigation would be started if this, after all, was not the case. No investigation followed. In April 2002, Kolkert, procecutor in-chief of the Court of Appeals in Den Bosch, demanded clarification in a letter sent to Stein, the state prosecutor ("landelijk officier van justitie") and responsible for interception matters. Stein stated that there are no problems. On august 24 the project leader of the National Interception Organisation ("Landelijk Interceptie Orgaan", LIO) J.Steeg announced that he plans to check the tapping rooms for backdoors. However, when the equipment was bought from the Israelis, it was agreed that no one except Comverse personnel was authorized to touch the systems, according to the insider of the AIVD (formerly BVD), the Dutch intelligence organization that spoke to the EO radioprogram De Ochtenden[4]. Source code would never be available to anyone. Finally, on October 10th, the Council of Chiefs of Police ("raad van hoofdcommisarissen") sent a confidential letter to the vendors of tapping equipment for ISPs and telcos expressing its concern about the situation in the US. All of this came after questions were raised publicly in the trial against Baybasin, co-founder of the Kurd parliament in exile, about the possible leaks in the Dutch tapping room as well as manipulation of the collected evidence[4b]. Baybasin was recently sentenced to life-long imprisonment for his connections to assassinations, kidnappings and heroine transports. His lawyers called in experts to question them about the possibility that Israel had laid hands on information tapped by the Dutch. The lawyers claim that Israeli then forwarded the information to the Turkish secret service[5]. Baybasin recently told the media about the Turkish government's involvement with crime syndicates. c't magazine warned about the blackbox problem in its June 2001 issue[6]. Opentap[7] gave similar warnings on the hacker conference HAL2001[8] in August of 2001 and at the Chaos Computer Club (CCC)[9] in December 2001 with a presentation on lawful interception in the Netherlands[10]. Hebrew as crypto The insiders at the AIVD and the tapping room were interviewed by the radio program of the EO[11]. According to them, the Dutch government and Comverse have a gentlemen's agreement that the Dutch government would get the Comverse systems for a very reduced price and in exchange the Israelis would get full access to all tapped information. The systems still ended up being more expensive than rejected competitors' quotes. The Comverse maintenance contract alone apparently costs more then the installation itself, according to the anonymous sources. Since the leaks seem to be disguised as maintenance, one could say that the Dutch government is actually paying the cost of foreign intelligence against the Dutch state. Israeli Comverse employees apparently show up in the tapping rooms on a very regular basis for maintenance, since no Dutch are allowed to touch the equipment. The radio program further stated that the maintenance is done using their own Hebrew keyboards and language. They leave the tapping rooms with filled MO-discs and no-one from the Dutch government has any idea what the Comverse people are doing. To make things yet worse, Comverse can dial-in to the tapping room equipment at all times. The possible criminal nature of Comverse and their overpricing are not the only problems. A comparison of the Comverse tapping records with billing records of KPN, the largest Dutch telco, shows that 20% of the calls that should be tapped, are not tapped at all. The Dutch government still keeps buying Comverse equipment. On November 26, a day after the EO radio program was broadcasted, three political parties, D'66, GroenLinks and SP asked questions to the government in parliamant. The current minister of interior, Remkens, answered that the chance of the tapping rooms leaking information is small, but not zero. He further claimed that the Comverse employees were given the most strict screening by the Dutch intelligence agency AIVD, and that they are never allowed to work without supervision. Comverse was chosen based on its price-performance results, the minister said. Hacking the system? In an interview with 2Vandaag[12], a daily Dutch television news program, defense specialist and LPF party leader Herben believes that there is enough cryptography know-how available in the Netherlands to hack the systems, if Comverse does not assist in the evaluation process. Apparently, Herben hasn't thought about the intrusion detection system that has undoubtedly been installed in these tapping systems by Comverse. He also seems to forget (as did Remkes) that these systems work in Hebrew. On top of it, proving the inner workings of the machines to be correct and safe is anything but a trivial task. The capacity of the MO-discs and the bandwidth of the dial-up facilities is not enough to copy a lot of Internet traffic or entire telephone conversations. A Comverse employee would have to swap disks so often, that he would have to use the tapping room as a hotel. So, assuming that there is no (illegal) high-speed Internet connection between the tapping room and the Israeli embassy, what the Comvers staff can do at the most on these visits is to copy a list of who talks to whom, and the cryptographic keys that are used to secure the tapping communications. Therefore, the Israelis don't need to copy entire phone conversations or all Internet traffic of a user from within the tapping room, but can simply monitor the encrypted traffic that is sent to the tapping room. Having the cryptographic key to the data, they then decrypt it at their leisure. If any nation has the technical skills and knowledge to pull this off, it is Israel. The experts We explained the situation to two cryptography experts: Niels Provos[13] of the OpenBSD team and author of various crypto software such as Outguess[14], a program to detect steganographic content, and Michael Richardson[15] of the FreeSwan Project, the IPsec implementation of Linux. We posed the hypothesis of the insecure tapping room and asked whether it would be possible for the Israelis to get a hold of our taps. Provos explains that a very important part of strong cryptography is a good random source. Without a proper random generator, or worse, with a intentionally crippled random generator, the resulting ciphertext becomes trivial to break. Even if Comverse would let experts have a look at the source code, if there is one single unknown chip involved with the random generation, such as a hardware accelerator chip, all bets are off. Provos suggests to use only off-the-shelf PC hardware. If you can trust the hardware and you have access to the source code, then it should theoretically be possible to verify the system. This, however, can just not be done without the source code, according to Provos. One possible undetectable scheme could be to use a set of truly random, but pre-calculated keys. Only those who know the pre-calculated set, Comverse in this case, could break the cipher, which would become a sort of one-time pad for Comverse only. Provos also pointed us to the work of Adam Young en Moti Yung, who have written a few papers on what they dubbed, kleptography[16], the art of secretly stealing the cryptographic key from the ciphertext stream itself. Their research showed it is impossible for third parties to detect whether any given ciphertext is secretly leaking key material. An overview of TIIT The Dutch tapping protocol, Transport of Intercepted IP Traffic[1] is used for the communication between the tapping machine at the ISP, and the Dutch government. The suspect who is using the Internet generates IP traffic that is copied by a special sniffer machine, called S1. The S1 then encrypts the traffic with an RC4 (or AES) key supplied (and generated) by the Dutch tapping room, and sends the encrypted traffic to the S2, the ISP's collector machine. The collector sets up an encrypted connection, using SSL or IPsec to the government collector machine, the T2. This will normally happen over the internet itself. The T1 then sends the encrypted information onwards to one more agencies, who all have their own T2 for receiving the encrypted traffic. The T2's have the key to decrypt the gathered data into the original plaintext, as it was captured by the ISP. Both the SSL and IPsec protocol, which are part of the encryption scheme used by the Dutch tapping specification (TIIT), contain parts where one has to "fill" packets with random data. It is impossible to see whether this data is truly random, or contains a secret message. This means that no-one needs to go to the tapping room to fetch the key material. According to Provos, the keys can just be sneaked into the encrypted tap itself. Richardson agrees with this view. There has even been a software implementation of this in the past. The TIS-client implemented this feature as "Government Access to Session Keys method". There are even rumors that the ciphers SHA1 and DSS, both NSA ciphers, leak key information on purpose, with only the NSA knowing how to retrieve it. Richardson claims that it is easy to use weak key material. And there are other dangers as well. Because RC4 is based on XOR, using the same key twice is enough to crack the code. RC4 is used for the inner encryption of user data in the TIIT, since the final AES candidate wasn't known at the time when the protocol was set. But this RC4 encrpytion is packaged in another layer of encryption, SSL or IPsec. That layer needs to be broken as well. Richardson takes IPsec as example. Imagine that we need to leak an RC4 key and an IPsec key. For RC4, only the first 128bits are relevant. For IPsec 3DES is often used, which means another two times 56bits. Each IPsec packet has an IV of 64 bits. This IV is random filling to ensure that there will never be two identical packets encrypted with the same key, a deadly sin in the world of cryptography. So this makes it possible to hide 64bits in each IPsec packet. Theoretically, after two packets you have leaked the RC4 key, and after another two you have the 3DES key too, although Richardson says that if such a scheme is used, it is very likely that the leaking would take place a bit slower, so it can be covered up. For example, the 64 bits can be divided in four parts of 16 bits hidden in the first 20 bits of four IV's. 16 bits of actual key material and four bits to point to the position of those bits in the key. That means that about 16 IPsec packets are needed to leak the entire key. According to Richardson, that would leave plenty of randomness in the IV to make this leakage invisible. Due to the overhead of IPsec and of the TIIT, this means the tapped user needs to cause even less packets for this to happen. In other words, reading a few lines of email or looking at a single webpage, is more then enough to leak all key information. Weis and Lucks showed that the use of the IV isn't even needed, and presented their paper All your keybits ...[17] at SANE2002[18] that mathematic proves that blackbox cryptography is fundamentally insecure and that leaking key material cannot be detected in any way. Conclusion Without the cooperation of Comverse, is it not possible to determine whether the Dutch tapping systems contain backdoors or not. Worse, even if Comverse would appear to cooperate, there is no way to detect a possible double-cross. Key information can leak quickly and undetectable and the only way to prevent that is by having full control over both the hardware and the software involved. In mid December, the parliament will discuss the annual report of the AIVD, but it seems unlikely that the public will ever find out what really happened. Remkes only wants to talk about these matters behind closed doors. De Graaf, party leader of D'66, said he finds the risk of possible manipulation of the tapping rooms "pretty serious", but cannot give more public statements, since he was a member of the watchdog commission that oversees the intelligence service AIVD, and therefore has inside sensitive knowledge. Remkes claims he didn't know about the dangers. Apparently, he was the last one that didn't know; Comverse and blackbox cryptography have been under heavy fire for years. Literature [1] http://www.opentap.org/documents/TIIT-v1.0.0.pdf [2] http://www.verintsystems.com/ [3] http://www.cominfosys.com/ [4] http://www.eo.nl/home/html/news.jsp?number=3209417 [4b] http://www.volkskrant.nl/binnenland/8761030113615.html [5] http://www.groene.nl/2002/0225/rz_tappen.html [6] http://www.fnl.nl/ct-nl/archief2001/ct2001-06/ct200106032033.htm [7] http://www.opentap.org/ [8] http://www.hal2001.nl/ [9] http://www.ccc.de/ [10] http://www.opentap.org/ccc/ [11] http://cgi.omroep.nl/cgi-bin/streams?/eo/redactie/radio/r1022511c.rm [12] http://cgi.omroep.nl/cgi-bin/streams?/eo/2vandaag/2vandaag_aftappen.rm [13] http://www.citi.umich.edu/u/provos [14] http://www.outguess.org/ [15] http://www.sandelman.ottawa.on.ca [16] http://home.bip.net/laszlob/cryptoag/kleptography.htm [17] http://www.nluug.nl/events/sane2002/papers/WeisLucksAllYourKeybit.ps [18] http://www.nluug.nl/events/sane2002/ ------------------------------ TELECOM Digest is an electronic journal devoted mostly but not exclusively to telecommunications topics. It is circulated anywhere there is email, in addition to various telecom forums on a variety of networks such as Compuserve and America On Line, Yahoo Groups, and other forums. It is also gatewayed to Usenet where it appears as the moderated newsgroup 'comp.dcom.telecom'. TELECOM Digest is a not-for-profit, mostly non-commercial educational service offered to the Internet by Patrick Townson. All the contents of the Digest are compilation-copyrighted. You may reprint articles in some other media on an occasional basis, but please attribute my work and that of the original author. Contact information: Patrick Townson/TELECOM Digest Post Office Box 50 Independence, KS 67301 Phone: 620-402-0134 Fax 1: 775-255-9970 Fax 2: 530-309-7234 Fax 3: 208-692-5145 Email: editor@telecom-digest.org Subscribe: telecom-subscribe@telecom-digest.org Unsubscribe:telecom-unsubscribe@telecom-digest.org This Digest is the oldest continuing e-journal about telecomm- unications on the Internet, having been founded in August, 1981 and published continuously since then. Our archives are available for your review/research. We believe we are the oldest e-zine/mailing list on the internet in any category! URL information: http://telecom-digest.org Anonymous FTP: mirror.lcs.mit.edu/telecom-archives/archives/ (or use our mirror site: ftp.epix.net/pub/telecom-archives) Email <==> FTP: telecom-archives@telecom-digest.org Send a simple, one line note to that automated address for a help file on how to use the automatic retrieval system for archives files. You can get desired files in email. ************************************************************************* * TELECOM Digest is partially funded by a grant from * * Judith Oppenheimer, President of ICB Inc. and purveyor of accurate * * 800 & Dot Com News, Intelligence, Analysis, and Consulting. * * http://ICBTollFree.com, http://1800TheExpert.com * * Views expressed herein should not be construed as representing * * views of Judith Oppenheimer or ICB Inc. * ************************************************************************* ICB Toll Free News. Contact information is not sold, rented or leased. One click a day feeds a person a meal. Go to http://www.thehungersite.com Copyright 2004 ICB, Inc. and TELECOM Digest. All rights reserved. Our attorney is Bill Levant, of Blue Bell, PA. ************************ DIRECTORY ASSISTANCE JUST 65 CENTS ONE OR TWO INQUIRIES CHARGED TO YOUR CREDIT CARD! REAL TIME, UP TO DATE! SPONSORED BY TELECOM DIGEST AND EASY411.COM SIGN UP AT http://www.easy411.com/telecomdigest ! ************************ --------------------------------------------------------------- Finally, the Digest is funded by gifts from generous readers such as yourself who provide funding in amounts deemed appropriate. Your help is important and appreciated. A suggested donation of fifty dollars per year per reader is considered appropriate. See our address above. Please make at least a single donation to cover the cost of processing your name to the mailing list. All opinions expressed herein are deemed to be those of the author. Any organizations listed are for identification purposes only and messages should not be considered any official expression by the organization. End of TELECOM Digest V23 #555 ****************************** From editor@telecom-digest.org Fri Nov 19 17:36:39 2004 Received: (from ptownson@localhost) by massis.lcs.mit.edu (8.11.6p3/8.11.6) id iAJMadg26869; Fri, 19 Nov 2004 17:36:39 -0500 (EST) Date: Fri, 19 Nov 2004 17:36:39 -0500 (EST) From: editor@telecom-digest.org Message-Id: <200411192236.iAJMadg26869@massis.lcs.mit.edu> X-Authentication-Warning: massis.lcs.mit.edu: ptownson set sender to editor@telecom-digest.org using -f To: ptownson Approved: patsnewlist Subject: TELECOM Digest V23 #556 TELECOM Digest Fri, 19 Nov 2004 17:37:00 EST Volume 23 : Issue 556 Inside This Issue: Editor: Patrick A. Townson USOC, SLDC, and FID Concepts (Matt) Call For Papers: Bellua Cyber Security Asia 2005 (Anthony Zboralski) Global Router sales Rise in 3Q (Telecom dailyLead from USTA) The Complete Communicator (A M Andrews) Great Telecom Blog (Cindi Jenkins) Re: SBC's VoIP End Run (Tim@Backhome.org) Re: SBC's VoIP End Run (jdj) Re: EFF: Anti-Spam Measures Block Free Speech (Barry Margolin) Re: EFF: Anti-Spam Measures Block Free Speech (Jim Hatfield) Re: Update: Vonage Ring Problem (John R. Covert) Re: Movie Studios to Sue Internet File Traders (charsand) Re: Looking For VOIP Provider That Do Business With Government (Weintz) Mystery Phone Number Revisited (Salvatore Petrarca) Re: Employment Opportunity: Do You Know Telco Expert? (Wesrock@aol.com) Re: What Wal-Mart Knows About Customers' Habits (Clarence Dold) Re: What Wal-Mart Knows About Customers' Habits (Lisa Hancock) Re: What Wal-Mart Knows About Customers' Habits (Wesrock@aol.com) Sears and K-Mart (Lisa Hancock) Sorry About the Explosion (TELECOM Digest Editor) All contents here are copyrighted by Patrick Townson and the individual writers/correspondents. Articles may be used in other journals or newsgroups, provided the writer's name and the Digest are included in the fair use quote. By using -any name or email address- included herein for -any- reason other than responding to an article herein, you agree to pay a hundred dollars to the recipients of the email. =========================== Addresses herein are not to be added to any mailing list, nor to be sold or given away without explicit written consent. Chain letters, viruses, porn, spam, and miscellaneous junk are definitely unwelcome. We must fight spam for the same reason we fight crime: not because we are naive enough to believe that we will ever stamp it out, but because we do not want the kind of world that results when no one stands against crime. Geoffrey Welsh =========================== See the bottom of this issue for subscription and archive details and the name of our lawyer; other stuff of interest. ---------------------------------------------------------------------- From: jrefactors@hotmail.com (Matt) Subject: USOC, SLDC, and FID Concepts Date: 19 Nov 2004 11:56:34 -0800 Organization: http://groups.google.com I tried to search for info. on USOC, SLDC, and FID, but couldn't find useful info. Can anyone gives me some definitions, or URL for those info.? Thanks!! ------------------------------ From: anthony.zboralski@gmail.com (Anthony Zboralski) Subject: Call for Papers: Bellua Cyber Security Asia 2005 Date: 19 Nov 2004 11:45:38 -0800 Organization: http://groups.google.com Dear all, Submissions related to Telecom Security will be greatly appreciated. Emmanuel Gadaix will be giving a talk on SS7 Security and hacking. Bellua Cyber Security Asia 2005 - http://www.bellua.com/bcs2005 Call for Papers and Workshops http://www.bellua.com/bcs2005/asia05.cfp.html From 21st - 24th March the largest information security conference in Asia will take place in Jakarta, Indonesia at the Hotel Borobudur. * 21-22 March 2005: Workshops * 23-24 March 2005: Conference Bellua will bring together over 20 researchers and practitioners from numerous disciplines to discuss present and future information security issues through an intensive series of workshops, presentations, technical sessions and demonstrations. The partial list of speakers include Ralph Logan, Adam O'Donnel, David Maynor [ISS X-Force], The Grugq, Jim Geovedi [HERT], Fetri Miftach and John Grygorcewicz. Over 30 workshops will be offered and taught by the most respected experts in the field. Ethical hacking & security contests will let novices develop their skills and challenge experts in their favorite arenas, allowing all a chance to win prizes. The program committe invites proposals for paper presentations, demonstrations and poster contributions on any topic relevant to cyber security and hacking. The conference talks will be spread across 2 concurrent tracks focusing on both business and technical aspects of information security. Your submission should include: 1. Name, title, address, email and phone number 2. Draft of the proposed presentation (in PDF, PowerPoint or Keynote format), proof of concept for tools and exploits, etc. 3. Short biography, qualification, occupation, achievement and affiliations (limit 150 words). 4. Summary or abstract for your presentation (limit 150 words) 5. Time (40-60 minutes). Include time for discussion and questions 6. Technical requirements (video, internet, wireless, audio, etc.) * Each speaker will receive an honorarium, hotel accommodation, and reimbursement of travel expenses. * Posters contributors will receive one complimentary conference pass. * Please read the detailed CFP at the following URL: http://www.bellua.com/bcs2005/asia05.cfp.html Please send your proposal to cfp2005@bellua.com as soon as possible and no later than 20 December 2005. Call for Workshops proposal This is also a call for workshops. One of the objectives of this meeting is to allow researchers to gain a background in areas that they may know little about. Towards that end a number of Workshops are planned. * Again please read the detailed CFP for more information: http://www.bellua.com/bcs2005/asia05.cfp.html Please send the workshop proposal to cfp2005@bellua.com as soon as possible and no later than 20 December 2005. Phone (GMT+7): +62 815 910 2495 Thanks & regards, 1. Name, title, address, email and phone number 2. Draft of the proposed presentation (in PDF, PowerPoint or Keynote format), proof of concept for tools and exploits, etc. 3. Short biography, qualification, occupation, achievement and affiliations (limit 150 words). 4. Summary or abstract for your presentation (limit 150 words) 5. Time (40-60 minutes). Include time for discussion and questions 6. Technical requirements (video, internet, wireless, audio, etc.) * Each speaker will receive an honorarium, hotel accommodation, and reimbursement of travel expenses. * Posters contributors will receive one complimentary conference pass. * Please read the detailed CFP at the following URL: http://www.bellua.com/bcs2005/asia05.cfp.html Please send your proposal to cfp2005@bellua.com as soon as possible and no later than 20 December 2005. Call for Workshops proposal This is also a call for workshops. One of the objectives of this meeting is to allow researchers to gain a background in areas that they may know little about. Towards that end a number of Workshops are planned. * Again please read the detailed CFP for more information: http://www.bellua.com/bcs2005/asia05.cfp.html Please send the workshop proposal to cfp2005@bellua.com as soon as possible and no later than 20 December 2005. Phone: +62 815 910 2495 (WIT - GMT+7) Thanks & regards, Anthony Zboralski Bellua Asia Pacific - http://www.bellua.com/bcs2005 ------------------------------ Date: Fri, 19 Nov 2004 13:18:49 EST From: Telecom dailyLead from USTA Subject: Global router sales rise in 3Q Telecom dailyLead from USTA November 19, 2004 http://www.dailylead.com/latestIssue.jsp?i=17630&l=2017006 TODAY'S HEADLINES NEWS OF THE DAY * Global router sales rise in 3Q BUSINESS & INDUSTRY WATCH * Vodafone signals intention to buy equipment from Chinese companies * Boeing, Alcatel strike deal * Karmazin takes helm at Sirius * Survey: Lackluster marketing costs wireless companies billions USTA SPOTLIGHT * USTA Brings Together the Industry in 2005 EMERGING TECHNOLOGIES * Vodafone, SingTel put final touches on Aussie 3G deal REGULATORY & LEGISLATIVE * Philadelphia's Wi-Fi plan comes under threat Follow the link below to read quick summaries of these stories and others. http://www.dailylead.com/latestIssue.jsp?i=17630&l=2017006 ------------------------------ From: ama3@aol.com (A M Andrews) Subject: The Complete Communicator Date: 19 Nov 2004 08:44:51 -0800 Organization: http://groups.google.com Looking for an answering/fax package for Win98 that is as good as the proprietary Complete Communicator was [for Win3.1]. "Was" because it seems to have disappeared -- and required its own modem. Everything was excellent: voices, defaults, setup ... Tried downloads/trial versions of others and setup is dreadful/non-intuitive, or worse, freezes system; usual response from help is "modem problem". Looking for basic telephone answering management package! ------------------------------ From: cindi@chiltown.com (Cindi Jenkins) Subject: Great Telecom Blog Date: 19 Nov 2004 08:04:22 -0800 Organization: http://groups.google.com http://blogs.ittoolbox.com/eai/leadership ------------------------------ From: Tim@Backhome.org Subject: Re: SBC's VoIP End Run Date: Fri, 19 Nov 2004 02:20:19 -0800 Organization: Cox Communications Lisa Minter quoted the original poster from VOIP News: > Also, bear in mind that if *everyone* were to move to VoIP and other > non-traditional forms of telephony, then SBC's tariffs wouldn't > matter much. But, that is wishful thinking for many, many years to come. Broadband is a prerequiste for VoIP, and the facilities are far from being able to provide universal broadband availability. Further, where broadband is provided via DSL rather than cable, it seems the LECs will still strangle the service unless you buy it from them. ------------------------------ From: jdj Subject: Re: SBC's VoIP End Run Date: Fri, 19 Nov 2004 09:09:46 -0800 Organization: Posted via Supernews, http://www.supernews.com SBC's anti competitiveness seems to be evident, particularly in the business services area. So many CLEC customers have had their DS1, PRI or supertrunk just stop working at various times of the day, for hours on end, only to be told by the CLEC that the CLEC is waiting for SBC to do something on their end. Interesting that the failures tend to be loss of carrier, clock, battery, loss of termination at the switch, etc., adn. But when the customer switches to SBC, the failures are all gone and never return! I recall some of the early history of The Bell System and the tactics it used to become the monopoly it was. It is not surprising that things have not changed much. [TELECOM Digest Editor's Note: No, things have not changed very much at all, especially where SBC -- Southwestern Bell -- is concerned, which is one reason I am inclined to stick with cable internet, even if they were not local people who run it here. PAT] ------------------------------ From: Barry Margolin Subject: Re: EFF: Anti-Spam Measures Block Free Speech Organization: Symantec Date: Fri, 19 Nov 2004 08:32:45 -0500 In article , Ed Clarke wrote: > In article , Monty Solomon wrote: >> EFF White Paper Reports on Collateral Damage to Free Expression in >> the Fight Against Spam >> San Francisco - Today the Electronic Frontier Foundation (EFF) >> released a white paper (HTML - PDF) describing the effects of >> anti-spam technologies on free speech. "Noncommercial Email Lists: >> Collateral Damage in the Fight Against Spam" focuses on how groups >> running noncommercial email lists are being harmed by anti-spam >> techniques. The paper grew out of EFF's efforts to help MoveOn.org, >> human rights groups, parents' groups, and others, deliver email >> messages in the face of barriers that are aimed at stopping spam but >> that also stop wanted messages. > This is absolutely on purpose. Collateral Damage is a necessary > technique to rid the net of spammers. If you give money to a company > that facilitates spamming then you are no better than a spammer. Move > the damn website to an IP range owned by a company that does not spam. > Let the spam supporting service providers go broke because they have > no customers. Where does it say that this is the reason why MoveOn.org's mail is being blocked? One of the other problems that the white paper mentioned is mailers that assume that any bulk email is spam -- but legitimate mailing lists will necessarily send out bulk email. What bugs me is EFF's use of the phrase "free speech" to make this sound like a 1st Amendment issue. The 1st Amendment only limits the *government's* ability to curtail free speech. It doesn't require organizations to facilitate any particular communications. Barry Margolin, barmar@alum.mit.edu Arlington, MA *** PLEASE post questions in newsgroups, not directly to me *** ------------------------------ From: Jim Hatfield Subject: Re: EFF: Anti-Spam Measures Block Free Speech Date: Fri, 19 Nov 2004 18:40:54 +0000 Organization: Insignia Solutions Reply-To: jim.hatfield@insignia.com On Thu, 18 Nov 2004 22:26:33 -0700, DevilsPGD wrote: > I see dumb people, walking around like regular people. They don't see > each other. They only see what they wanna see. They don't know they're > dumb. Sixth Sense aside, there are people here in the UK who have devoted themselves to spotting and sneering at "dumb people": http://www.chavscum.co.uk/ You'd think people would have better things to do with their time. Jim Hatfield ------------------------------ Date: Fri, 19 Nov 2004 13:05:45 -0500 (EST) From: John R. Covert Subject: Re: Update: Vonage Ring Problem If I remember correctly, the original discussion on this involved some old standard WeCo phones that were not ringing well on ATAs. I had that problem, and solved it by opening up all my phones (now connected to ATAs rather than to the traditional phone net) and moving the bell tension spring from the strong to the weak position. In the strong position, the bell requires a higher voltage to ring properly. In the weak position, on a long loop you end up with bell tinkle when other extensions go off an on-hook and during rotary dialing. Bell tinkle is not a problem when connected to the short loop inside your single dwelling only. There's no real need to up the voltage on the ATA if you just change the bell tension. In re the recent discussion about post dial delay on Vonage: They are not currently making "#" a terminator for timing on calls not beginning with "011", so it does no good. You will have a timeout on any call that does not begin with "1" since they are allowing variable length dialling. For example, you can call a Vonage (only a Vonage) customer with a UK number by dialling just 44 nn nnnn nnnn. There are currently no ambiguities with a U.S. 44X NXX XXXX number, and the decision on how to process the call is based on the length. Note that this ONLY works for actual Vonage customers with UK numbers, and not for other numbers in the UK. These calls are all Vonage in-network calls, and are free for Vonage customers, as well as if dialled from FWD using their peering code **243 44 nn nnnn nnnn. At the moment this only applies to Vonage UK "Virtual Numbers" pointing to US Vonage customers, but I fully expect (could turn out to be wrong) for it to work the same way for real Vonage UK customers later this year. /john ------------------------------ From: charlize_sand@yahoo.com (charsand) Subject: Re: Movie Studios to Sue Internet File Traders Date: 19 Nov 2004 11:35:08 -0800 Organization: http://groups.google.com billyzane1@excite.com (Bob Smythe) wrote in message news:: > The thing is, it is illegal to download or upload copyrighted works, > the concept of file sharing and actual file sharing is not illegal. I > do not condone illegal file sharing, but am just trying to clarify a > few things. > The MPAA (and RIAA) have not and will not target individual > downloaders. There is no real way to get them. They are not a law > enforcement agency. They cannot entrap individual users. If you > download from them, and they are the rightful owners, then there is no > law broken, even if it is widely know that the service being used is > to illegally obtain files. Plus having downloaded one file will not be > worthwhile anyway in court. > They will focus and be able to bust those who share (uploaders) works > they do not own. These are the people who are illegally distributing, > offering, sharing and causing the industry the most harm, and > potentially profiting from this type of activity. > Bottom line is if you do not share, then you run little to no risk of > being caught. > But people need to realize the impact reaches far beyond whether or > not they get caught. They are hurting our economy. A great number of > jobs and resources goes into creating movies and songs, and you are > stealing money out of their pockets and retailers, etc.. > For me, I do not like the threat of viruses and poor sound and picture > quality. That is why I stay away from such activity. That is the > greater threat. The fact that it is also illegal makes it even less > appealing. > Just buy the damn videos y'all. The industry will benefit by offering > an I-Tunes type service for those who want to get movies via > downloading for an affordable price. Say -8 bucks for a movie. YOu > have to go by the hardware and software to burn it and the dual > layered DVD's are like 4 bucks a pop I think. > BOB > Lisa Minter wrote in message > news:: >> LOS ANGELES (Reuters) - Taking a cue from the music industry, film >> studios and the Motion Picture Association of America said on Thursday >> that they were readying the first lawsuits against people suspected of >> illegally distributing movies over the Internet. >> The civil suits will seek to stop trading and damages of up >> to $30,000 per film, the MPAA said, adding that damages could >> reach $150,000 if the infringement was deemed willful. >> Record companies have led the way with such lawsuits, targeting major >> traders of song files who use Kazaa and other programs to swap songs >> on the Web. The movie trade group, representing Hollywood's major >> studios, plans to launch its own legal challenges beginning Nov. 16. >> Studios have been slow to release DVD-quality films on the Internet >> because of the twin piracy and technological shortcomings -- it takes >> hours to download even a film at lower quality levels, while it takes >> minutes or seconds to download a song. Improving technology is cutting >> the gap, though. >> "That distinction is rapidly vanishing, so we are taking these actions >> to try and prevent this illegal activity from becoming mainstream," >> the MPAA said in a statement, adding that future technologies could >> allow movie downloads in as few as six seconds. >> MPAA President and Chief Executive Dan Glickman said at a news >> conference that the music industry has had an impact on music piracy >> with its lawsuits. >> That campaign has had a mixed reception from consumers and some in the >> industry, who have urged movie and music makers to develop easy-to-use >> technology for buying or renting content that would be a viable >> alternative to illegal downloads. >> Apple Computer Inc's iTunes is often heralded as an example of legal >> song buying that works. >> "The industry should be thinking of new ways to deploy the new >> technology rather than suing the consumer," said Mediaport >> Entertainment Inc. Chief Executive Helen Seltzer, which makes kiosks, >> or automatic teller machines, to buy and download music. "We find that >> if students are given an easy way to download, they will do it and pay >> for it happily," she said. >> An MPAA attorney said studios would launch fewer lawsuits than the >> record industry, which has pursued more than 5,000 people to >> date. Studios would also use "John Doe" lawsuits that allow them to >> pursue file traders without knowing the traders' identities. >> Chris Ruhland, a former studio lawyer now at Orrick Herrington & >> Sutcliffe, forecast the movie makers would win their days in >> court. "The law is very clear that unauthorized distribution of >> copyrighted material is illegal," he said. >> Reuters/VNU > [TELECOM Digest Editor's Note: What MPAA and RIAA do not understand > (or pretend not to understand) is the purposes for which the net was > developed: It was developed for the sharing of ideas and files, at > no charge between the participants. What MPAA/RIAA seem to want is > the ability to put out their goods all over the public sidewalk, but > they do not feel people should be free to to examine same goods at > their leisure without paying for them. The net was around for a long > time before MPAA/RIAA came around wanting to put their trash out on > the public roadway, and they wanted to change the rules the minute > they got here from a place of free expression to a place where you > have to pay to view their stuff. There are plenty of ways to mark > directories (on computers) to keep people out of them who have not > paid. But it seems to be more to their advantage to use the net as > an advertising media then file suit against people who stop to look > (too long, and too extensively) rather than just move along. I do not > really have any sympathy for those relative newcomers to the net. PAT] I heard somewhere that those caught could receive not only fines, but jail time-is this true? [TELECOM Digest Editor's Note: It would not suprise me at all. Nor does it surprise me that they just toss out lawsuits all over the place without even having the *name* or *any identity* of the persons they intend to sue. I can see where 'John Doe' might be a valid way to sue someone you had caught when you could not otherwise get his name, but lawsuits at random against John Does 1 through 9999 (fill in the names, addresses and particulars when you find the person) seems to me to be a gross abuse of the legal system. But they seem to be setting out the lawsuits, then finding the person later on and already having the suit set up. Not a good faith thing, IMO. PAT] ------------------------------ From: T. Sean Weintz Subject: Re: Looking For VOIP Provider That Can Do Business With Government Date: Fri, 19 Nov 2004 09:31:42 -0500 Organization: Posted via Supernews, http://www.supernews.com TELECOM Digest Editor noted in response to T. Sean Weintz: > [TELECOM Digest Editor's Note: Take your choice of them; personally > I suggest Vonage. If your volume of business is of any value to them > (and I think it might be), they'll figure out a way to write off the > 'tax' they think is due. PAT] Pat- Problem is it would NOT be high volume. Just 2-3 lines. What I plan on doing is hanging them off our PBX and having it route only the long distance calls over the VOIP lines. Have spoken to the Billing Dept at Vonage and they actually sounded annoyed at me for even asking. ------------------------------ Date: Fri, 19 Nov 2004 11:33:47 -0500 From: Salvatore Petrarca Subject: Mystery Phone Number Revisited Mr. Townson, Recently, I was contacted by a company/person with the phone number (866) 383-0986. A google search lead me to the edition of your newsletter referenced in the subject line. I attempted to contact Mr. Covert (whom is in the same situation as I) via e-mail in order to give him the information I gathered on the organization that had called both of us. My e-mail, however was bounced back. I am not requesting that you give me his e-mail address, I simply request that you forward the following message to him, if at all possible. -------------------------------- I recently recieved a call from the number 866-383-0986. A Google search yielded the MIT document (located here) with your transmission in it. > Date: Wed, 30 Jun 2004 16:28:15 -0400 (EDT) > From: John R. Covert Subject: Indian Telemarketing Shop Service-Monitoring Line? > There's an interesting number on the caller-id of my fax line. The > call disconnected with no fax received. (866) 383-0986 > If you call it back, you get a recording with a distinctive Indian > accent saying, "Please dial the extension number which you want to > monitor." > Hmmmmm. > john After doing some research, I came upon the following information: Media Direct Marketing Consultants 1822 North Bend Drive Knoxville, TN 37909 (866) 383-0986 I seem to remember "Media Direct" coming up in quite a few spyware searches I've run. It's possible that by entering your fax number into a textarea in a webpage, the spyware could have picked it up and sent the information home, which is why they tried to "call" your fax machine. Have you been able to contact the company between the time you posted the message and now? Thanks, Sal Petrarca [TELECOM Digest Editor's Note: Mr. Covert reads this Digest on occassion so perhaps he will see your message here and respond. PAT] ------------------------------ From: Wesrock@aol.com Date: Fri, 19 Nov 2004 11:00:03 EST Subject: Re: Employment Opportunity: Do You Know a Telco Maintenance Expert? In a message dated Thu, 18 Nov 2004 04:33:08 EST, HotJobs@MicroSurvivor.com writes: > On behalf of my client, I am looking for Technology Experts in the > area of "outside plant telecommunications", with respect to aerial or > buried cable comprising copper wire, coax or fiber optics, that are > interested in serving as an "Expert Witnesses" for a prestigious > litigation case to possibly set precedence for the industry. While we usually don't quibble about spelling errors, I would be concerned about seeking work with a lawyer who cannot distinguish between "precedents" and "precedence." That's more than just a spelling error. Wes Leatherock wesrock@aol.com wleathus@yahoo.com [TELECOM Digest Editor's Note: At least he did not spell it 'president' as in Presedence Bush. PAT] ------------------------------ From: dold@XReXXWhatX.usenet.us.com Subject: Re: What Wal-Mart Knows About Customers' Habits Date: Fri, 19 Nov 2004 18:49:42 UTC Organization: a2i network > [TELECOM Digest Editor's Note: that closely. There was a K-Mart in > the complex where Walmart is located; Walmart drove them out of > business two years ago. On the In Napa, California, there was a very old KMart store in a "strip mall" with a few other stores. The Lucky's grocery store closed when Alpha Beta bought Lucky's, and they kept a store open a couple of blocks away. KMart wanted to expand, opening one of their newer Super-KMarts, taking over the Lucky's space. Napa said no. They didn't want the expansion. They wanted another store to move in to Lucky's. KMart closed the store as too small and too old for their new network. The other little shops closed without the major draws in the shopping center. Six months later, Walmart razed the entire strip mall and built a new store that encompassed more square footage than the entire complex had before, and they are the sole store in the complex. Did Napa make a mistake, and decide to take an offer from Walmart? Had they already received the offer from Walmart before KMart asked? I was surprised that Walmart would put a store in Napa, since there was already one in American Canyon, 14 miles away. Since then, they have applied for a move of the American Canyon store to a larger position 3 miles closer to Napa. Other stores can stay in business, but only in little tiny niches. No one can compete with Walmart. A new move by Walmart will leave merchandise in the inventory of the supplier until it is sold. $60 billion will disappear from Walmart books. This would really be "just in time". It would never belong to Walmart. It would be sold directly from the distributor to the consumer at the Walmart checkout. I think that is how Amazon.com operates with some of their suppliers, but they don't have physical control of the item, it remains with the distributor, who might route it elsewhere. In the Walmart case, it wouldn't be available for other use by the distributor. Clarence A Dold - Hidden Valley (Lake County) CA USA 38.8-122.5 [TELECOM Digest Editor's Note: Distance between stores is not an issue for Walmart. In addition to ours here, they have another one in Coffeyville, and others throughout southeast Kansas. PAT] ------------------------------ From: hancock4@bbs.cpcn.com (Lisa Hancock) Subject: Re: What Wal-Mart Knows About Customers' Habits Date: 19 Nov 2004 11:06:13 -0800 Organization: http://groups.google.com Telecom editor wrote: > ... in 1963, I was employed by the fund raising committee to build a > new McCormick YWCA ... one of the guests at the luncheon was Myrtle > Walgreen, ... she reached in her purse and pulled out a check for > **fifty thousand dollars** I presume by that time the Walgreen chain had started and was properous. There in lies a dilemna -- on the one had chains have a lot of money, on the other hand, the families of said chains can be quite generous with it. Andrew Carnegie, who was quite ruthless as the head of US Steel, donated much of his fortune to public works, indeed, I think a foundation he created is still giving out money. (Libraries were a favorite and he built many throughout the country). > Walgreens *used to have* a soda fountain/lunch counter in every one of > their stores... Here's an example of the conflict between business vs. the town, mixed in with big and small. (Forgive parts previously discussed here). We had an independent drugstore that had a traditional soda fountain and lunch counter. The town liked that. However, the town's fathers had several run-ins with the pharmacist (the owner) over their historic district policies, parking, and allowable signage. The pharmacist closed up and went out of business. Frankly, the town fathers didn't care on account of their disputes, though many of the citizens liked his soda fountain and felt it added a lot to the "historicness" of the town. (Note the irony?) Anyway, CVS came in. Sometimes the town makes a business go through many hoops before it is approved. But CVS' plan sailed right through. They took over an empty store and fully rennovated it in an historic style (I must admit it does look nice). The town fathers were very pleased at the outcome. But none of them brought up the issue of independent vs. chain or the loss of the lunch counter. The inside of the CVS is cold and sterile. For good or bad the independent pharmacy owner was part of the community. The manager of the CVS is anonymous. The employees of the independent tended to stay a long time. Even kids he'd hire would start young and stay with him all through high school and college until they finally moved out into the real world; in contrast the kids at the CVS (who have much more customer contact including in the pharmacy) tend to turnover very rapidly. [Remember the old "Wonder Years" episode where Kevin worked for the grouchy hardware store owner, only to quit and briefly work anonymously at the mall?] If you get a smart kid you're well served, but most of them are pretty dumb, pretty bored, and very apathetic. They spend their time gossiping on their cellphones playing their boyfriends against each other. (When you're standing at the counter waiting to be rung up, you hear some nasty conversations among those teen girls). (As an aside, the whole thing illustrates the troubles of "historic districts" because the definitions of "historic" and allowable rennovations are so subjective.) Another business closed up and the building was available. The owner sold it to Starbucks. The town fathers were very anxious to get that through since they didn't want an empty building. But the people in the town objected to Starbucks and it led to a lot of protests. A neighboring business cleared trees from their parking lot to provide more parking and people were upset about that. The Starbucks did come in and it seems very nice although I myself won't spend $3 for a cup of coffee I can get for 79c down the street at the convenience store. Pat's point about an empty building vs. a chain in it is a good one. Also, not all chains are cold. We have a locally owned supermarket that charges premium prices. Some of my neighbors don't like it because he's expensive and shop in the chain supermarkets instead. But they had to admit the local owner is very supportive of community projects, such as sponsoring youth sports teams, a major donation to the 9/11 memorial, etc. The chains do nothing. ------------------------------ From: Wesrock@aol.com Date: Fri, 19 Nov 2004 10:55:45 EST Subject: Re: What Wal-Mart Knows About Customers' Habits In a message dated 18 Nov 2004 09:41:13 -0800, hancock4@bbs.cpcn.com (Lisa Hancock) writes: > In the supermarket world, A&P was once a major leading chain. > It's still around but far from being a leader. Wasn't the Great Atlantic and Pacific Tea Company (the full corporate name of A&P Stores) once the largest retailer in the world, as Wal-Mart is now? ------------------------------ From: hancock4@bbs.cpcn.com (Lisa Hancock) Subject: Sears and K-Mart Date: 19 Nov 2004 11:50:34 -0800 Organization: http://groups.google.com [Telecom related stuff at the very end.] I am not thrilled about this merger because I fear it will bring out the bad aspects of both stores, not the better ones. I never liked SS Kresge (K-Mart's predecessor), always preferring Walmart. I never liked K-Mart, preferring other discount chains. Today I like Target. My last visit to K-Mart was quite miserable; they didn't have the advertised sale item and no one knew how to check the stock in the back or get more. I feel Sears has gone downhill in the last few years. In an effort to be more efficient, they have heavilly computerized. It can be difficult being on the other end of such systems when you need help as a customer. They are very much geared to "mass production" or universal service. My local store doesn't even have any customer service area to sit down with someone about the credit card or problem; everything is handled on the sales floor at the registers. The store is disorganized and very messy. They have spots of bare concrete floor awaiting rennovation, and merchandise piled high on tables unkempt. It's more like a old-neighborhood bargain store than a distinguished national department store. I don't expect tea and crumpets, but at least some cleanliness. My Sears charge card keeps getting all sorts of revision of its rules with booklets loaded with fine print. Makes me very nervous to use it, so I destroyed it. My area has a nice regional department store chain called Boscov's. They are not fancy, but very nice, and I hope they continue to succeed and thrive and not pressured out by the big boys. Their salespeople (who tend to be older people) are most helpful. Mr. Boscov, age 65 (son or grandson of the founder) is an old-style merchant prince--running around visiting every store, personally checking on displays, talking to customers and employees etc. I think most of the big chain dept stores need someone like Mr. Boscov who personally gets involved. That's how the old time merchants built up their businesses. But today they bring in anonymous managers who get transferred from city to city and have no loyalty to anything. They care solely about numbers on a computer printout generated by mysterious formulas. While these things are important (and even Mr. Boscov uses them), the human touch is important too. Consumer tastes are different in different cities, and _within neighborhoods_ of different cities. A store in a working class area will have different needs than a store in a fancy preppy suburb; but how is some distant chain HQ supposed to know what branches are what? Mr. Boscov will know because he spends time talking to his customers. JC Penney used to know since he did the same thing -- running around the stores until very late in life. I bet Sam Walton used to know, too, but does his successors? They said Walmart had to learn the hard way that Tide detergent wouldn't sell in some countries since they don't have washing machines. They needed to develop a hand version. There are two other national chains serving my area -- Strawbridges which I believe is owned by the May Company (who bought them) and Macy's. I think both are too homogenized and bland, governed by the impersonal printout. My local carrier, Verizon, is running the same risk of becomming too distant from the people it serves. Years ago they had business offices in regions, several throughout a big city. Today when you call them (they no longer accomodate in-person visits) your call can be routed anywhere. In the old days you could describe the intersection of your property to the service or repair rep and they'd know what you were talking about, not now. I realize with electronic switching and the Internet phone service is much more homogenized than in the days of party line SxS vs. a big crossbar system. But I still suspect different communities will have different calling and Internet needs, and that would impact the effectiveness of sales efforts and equipment upgrades. Perhaps kids in one neighborhood will be into voice calls while another into instant messaging on broadband. Perhaps business demands will vary. [TELECOM Digest Editor's Note: In your last paragraph, '...electronic switching and Internet phone service vrs. party lines, SxS, etc ...' Yeah, but that's not *your* fault. All you want to get is some modicum of customer service. Why can't *they* take the responsibility for teaching *their people* how times have changed and what *they* need to do? Even if there were no difference at all in prices and Marvins charged the same or or more than Walmart for their groceries I would still go to Marvins. Why? Because the cashiers smile at me and try to be helpful. The high school guys who are baggers an stock clerks are most helpful in finding stuff on the shelves I want. When I check out and pay, the boy who bagged my stuff *always, without fail* pushes the cart out the door for me and gets me a chair to sit in. Then he says, "do you want me to call Jeff (the cab driver) to come and get you or do you want to call yourself?" When the cab arrives, *he* puts the stuff in the trunk or the backseat, and thanks me for shopping at Marvins. When is the last time Walmart ever did anything like that? PAT] ------------------------------ Date: Fri, 19 Nov 2004 16:28:29 EST From: TELECOM Digest Editor Subject: Sorry About the Explosion Issue 555 went out originally ONCE at 2:04 AM Eastern time. Then early Friday afternoon it went out again, and again, and again, and again, and again. Some testing was going on here which caused the problem. I am sorry. PAT ------------------------------ TELECOM Digest is an electronic journal devoted mostly but not exclusively to telecommunications topics. It is circulated anywhere there is email, in addition to various telecom forums on a variety of networks such as Compuserve and America On Line, Yahoo Groups, and other forums. It is also gatewayed to Usenet where it appears as the moderated newsgroup 'comp.dcom.telecom'. TELECOM Digest is a not-for-profit, mostly non-commercial educational service offered to the Internet by Patrick Townson. All the contents of the Digest are compilation-copyrighted. You may reprint articles in some other media on an occasional basis, but please attribute my work and that of the original author. Contact information: Patrick Townson/TELECOM Digest Post Office Box 50 Independence, KS 67301 Phone: 620-402-0134 Fax 1: 775-255-9970 Fax 2: 530-309-7234 Fax 3: 208-692-5145 Email: editor@telecom-digest.org Subscribe: telecom-subscribe@telecom-digest.org Unsubscribe:telecom-unsubscribe@telecom-digest.org This Digest is the oldest continuing e-journal about telecomm- unications on the Internet, having been founded in August, 1981 and published continuously since then. Our archives are available for your review/research. We believe we are the oldest e-zine/mailing list on the internet in any category! URL information: http://telecom-digest.org Anonymous FTP: mirror.lcs.mit.edu/telecom-archives/archives/ (or use our mirror site: ftp.epix.net/pub/telecom-archives) Email <==> FTP: telecom-archives@telecom-digest.org Send a simple, one line note to that automated address for a help file on how to use the automatic retrieval system for archives files. You can get desired files in email. ************************************************************************* * TELECOM Digest is partially funded by a grant from * * Judith Oppenheimer, President of ICB Inc. and purveyor of accurate * * 800 & Dot Com News, Intelligence, Analysis, and Consulting. * * http://ICBTollFree.com, http://1800TheExpert.com * * Views expressed herein should not be construed as representing * * views of Judith Oppenheimer or ICB Inc. * ************************************************************************* ICB Toll Free News. Contact information is not sold, rented or leased. One click a day feeds a person a meal. Go to http://www.thehungersite.com Copyright 2004 ICB, Inc. and TELECOM Digest. All rights reserved. Our attorney is Bill Levant, of Blue Bell, PA. ************************ DIRECTORY ASSISTANCE JUST 65 CENTS ONE OR TWO INQUIRIES CHARGED TO YOUR CREDIT CARD! REAL TIME, UP TO DATE! SPONSORED BY TELECOM DIGEST AND EASY411.COM SIGN UP AT http://www.easy411.com/telecomdigest ! ************************ --------------------------------------------------------------- Finally, the Digest is funded by gifts from generous readers such as yourself who provide funding in amounts deemed appropriate. Your help is important and appreciated. A suggested donation of fifty dollars per year per reader is considered appropriate. See our address above. Please make at least a single donation to cover the cost of processing your name to the mailing list. All opinions expressed herein are deemed to be those of the author. Any organizations listed are for identification purposes only and messages should not be considered any official expression by the organization. End of TELECOM Digest V23 #556 ****************************** From editor@telecom-digest.org Sat Nov 20 00:29:05 2004 Received: (from ptownson@localhost) by massis.lcs.mit.edu (8.11.6p3/8.11.6) id iAK5T5B01333; Sat, 20 Nov 2004 00:29:05 -0500 (EST) Date: Sat, 20 Nov 2004 00:29:05 -0500 (EST) From: editor@telecom-digest.org Message-Id: <200411200529.iAK5T5B01333@massis.lcs.mit.edu> X-Authentication-Warning: massis.lcs.mit.edu: ptownson set sender to editor@telecom-digest.org using -f To: ptownson Approved: patsnewlist Subject: TELECOM Digest V23 #557 TELECOM Digest Sat, 20 Nov 2004 00:29:00 EST Volume 23 : Issue 557 Inside This Issue: Editor: Patrick A. Townson Should I Put Cell Phone Number on Natl Do Not Call List? (Marcus Falco) Lexmark Accused of Installing Spyware (Monty Solomon) Re: Looking For VOIP Provider to Do Business With Government (Weintz) Re: Looking For VOIP Provider to Do Business With Government (J Levine) Re: Movie Studios to Sue Internet File Traders (Lee Hollaar) Re: Movie Studios to Sue Internet File Traders (Robert Bonomi) Re: The Complete Communicator (Marcus Didius Falco) Re: The Complete Communicator (Robert Bonomi) Off-Shore Call Centers (John Schmerold) Re: NEC IP Phone Works, One Way (Robert Bonomi) Re: USOC, SLDC, and FID Concepts Re: Somewhat Off Topic But a Must Read (Robert Bonomi) Re: EFF: Anti-Spam Measures Block Free Speech (Ed Clarke) Re: What Wal-Mart Knows About Customers' Habits (Wesrock@aol.com) Last Laugh! Re: Texas Officials Wary of Plan to Hunt by Internet (Bell) All contents here are copyrighted by Patrick Townson and the individual writers/correspondents. Articles may be used in other journals or newsgroups, provided the writer's name and the Digest are included in the fair use quote. By using -any name or email address- included herein for -any- reason other than responding to an article herein, you agree to pay a hundred dollars to the recipients of the email. =========================== Addresses herein are not to be added to any mailing list, nor to be sold or given away without explicit written consent. Chain letters, viruses, porn, spam, and miscellaneous junk are definitely unwelcome. We must fight spam for the same reason we fight crime: not because we are naive enough to believe that we will ever stamp it out, but because we do not want the kind of world that results when no one stands against crime. Geoffrey Welsh =========================== See the bottom of this issue for subscription and archive details and the name of our lawyer; other stuff of interest. ---------------------------------------------------------------------- Date: Fri, 19 Nov 2004 18:44:32 -0500 From: Marcus Didius Falco Subject: Should I Put Cell Phone on National do Not Call List? Thanks Mike G. for finding this. http://urbanlegends.about.com/library/bl_cell_phone_directory.htm Comments: While it's true that the major wireless phone providers (with the sole exception of Verizon) have announced their intention to compile a directory of customers' cell phone numbers, it isn't true that they plan to "publish" said directory for all to see. The numbers will be made available only if customers opt in, and will be accessible only by those who call information and pay a fee. Participating service providers swear the numbers will never be available to telemarketers. Not everyone believes that, however, as evidenced by a privacy protection bill already introduced in Congress which would modify the plan to allow 411 callers to be directly connected to requested parties but would not allow those parties' numbers to be given out. It remains to be seen precisely what form the cell phone "directory" will ultimately take. Meanwhile, the Federal Trade Commission does allow http://urbanlegends.about.com/gi/dynamic/offsite.htm?site=https://www.donotcall.gov/FAQ/FAQConsumersNew.aspx worried cell phone users to add their numbers to the National Do Not Call Registry the same one that is already in force for landlines either online or by calling 1-888-382-1222 . Online registration: www.donotcall.gov ------------------------------ Date: Fri, 19 Nov 2004 20:31:54 -0500 From: Monty Solomon Subject: Lexmark Accused of Installing Spyware Dan Ilett ZDNet UK A Usenet news group has claimed that Lexmark is installing spyware on its customers' computers. Allegations have been swirling around an online newsgroup this week that printer manufacturer Lexmark has been installing spyware on its customers' computers. Reports on the comp.periphs.printers Usenet newsgroup claim that Lexmark has been planting spyware on its customers' PCs in the form of undocumented software that monitors the use of its printers and silently reports back to a Lexmark-owned company Web site. http://news.zdnet.co.uk/internet/security/0,39020375,39173517,00.htm Lexmark spyware puts hardware in security spotlight Dan Ilett ZDNet UK The revelation that Lexmark uses software that monitors customers' printing raises interesting questions for other hardware vendors, says a technology lawyer. Allegations of printer manufacturer Lexmark installing "spyware" will cause hardware companies to reconsider their licensing practices, a leading technology law firm has said. Experts at law firm Olswang believe hardware companies have to review their data-gathering tactics to play fairly with their customers. Lexmark and fellow printer firm HP have admitted to ZDNet that they use software to collect information on their customers' printing habits. Although the companies claim that no personal data is collected, the Lexmark program gathers information on things such CPU and button usage. http://news.zdnet.co.uk/internet/security/0,39020375,39174382,00.htm The Lexmark lesson - make more noise Rupert Goodwins ZDNet UK November 16, 2004, 17:45 GMT Lexmark's inky fingers are all over your printer data -- but did you say 'help yourself'? Lexmark's printers are smarter than they look. Perhaps a little too smart -- a recent story showed that the printer drivers for a recent model were surreptitiously relaying information over the Internet back to base. Users were mystified, and more than a little outraged. Spyware, they said. Lexmark was stung. 'It's not spyware, it's remote reporting about printer parameters,' the company said after a marked pause. We told you all about it when you installed the drivers. It's even got a name -- Lexmark Connect. http://comment.zdnet.co.uk/rupertgoodwins/0,39020691,39174087,00.htm ------------------------------ From: T. Sean Weintz Subject: Re: Looking For VOIP Provider That Can Do Business With Government Date: Fri, 19 Nov 2004 18:25:54 -0500 Organization: Posted via Supernews, http://www.supernews.com T. Sean Weintz wrote: > Problem is it would NOT be high volume. Just 2-3 lines. What I plan on > doing is hanging them off our PBX and having it route only the long > distance calls over the VOIP lines. > Have spoken to the Billing Dept at Vonage and they actually sounded > annoyed at me for even asking. Never mind. Thanks to all who replied -- turns out someone in our purchasing dept didn't know what they were talking about, and we DO pay federal excise tax. ------------------------------ Date: 20 Nov 2004 04:14:34 -0000 From: John Levine Subject: Re: Looking For VOIP Provider That Can Do Business With Government Organization: I.E.C.C., Trumansburg NY USA > Problem is it would NOT be high volume. Just 2-3 lines. What I plan on > doing is hanging them off our PBX and having it route only the long > distance calls over the VOIP lines. Oh, forget it. Vonage numbers all terminate on Vonage-provided terminal adapters, except for their auxiliary softphone numbers. Try iconnecthere.com which offers very reasonably priced outbound service and lets you use any adapter you want. John R. Levine, IECC, POB 727, Trumansburg NY 14886 +1 607 330 5711 johnl@iecc.com, Mayor, http://johnlevine.com, Member, Provisional board, Coalition Against Unsolicited Commercial E-mail ------------------------------ From: hollaar@faith.cs.utah.edu (Lee Hollaar) Subject: Re: Movie Studios to Sue Internet File Traders Date: Fri, 19 Nov 2004 23:30:14 UTC Organization: University of Utah Computer Science In article charlize_sand@yahoo.com (charsand) writes: > I heard somewhere that those caught could receive not only fines, but > jail time-is this true? Not from an RIAA or MPAA suit. All they can get is an injunction against future file sharing and civil damages. But statutory damages of up to $150,000 per movie or song can be awarded without proof of actual damages. Plus court costs and attorney fees. But there is also criminal copyright infringement, a felony about certain levels which most large "file sharers" exceed. Like all federal criminal prosecutions, it must be brought by the U.S. Attorney, not the copyright owner. > [TELECOM Digest Editor's Note: It would not suprise me at all. Nor > does it surprise me that they just toss out lawsuits all over the > place without even having the *name* or *any identity* of the persons > they intend to sue. I can see where 'John Doe' might be a valid way > to sue someone you had caught when you could not otherwise get his > name, but lawsuits at random against John Does 1 through 9999 (fill > in the names, addresses and particulars when you find the person) > seems to me to be a gross abuse of the legal system. But they seem to > be setting out the lawsuits, then finding the person later on and > already having the suit set up. Not a good faith thing, IMO. PAT] As much as one might hate the RIAA or MPAA, it's not reasonable to blame them for filing "John Doe" suits or not contacting the people before filing suit. Originally, under the DMCA a copyright owner that only knew the IP address of an alleged infringer could get their name and address from their ISP using a special subpoena. Verizon resisted those subpeonas and convinced the DC Circuit Court of Appeals that they were not authorized against file-sharers because a misdrafting of the DMCA. See RIAA v. Verizon, 351 F.3d 1229, 69 USPQ2d 1075 (CA DC 2003). That means that in order to get a user's name from an ISP, a "John Doe" suit must be filed first, and then the name is subpoenaed from the ISP. More expense, same result. Hard to see how ISP customers were helped, since in the end the loser has to pay these added costs. ------------------------------ Organization: Robert Bonomi Consulting Subject: Re: Movie Studios to Sue Internet File Traders From: bonomi@host122.r-bonomi.com (Robert Bonomi) Date: Sat, 20 Nov 2004 01:46:06 +0000 In article , charsand wrote: > billyzane1@excite.com (Bob Smythe) wrote in message > news:: >> The thing is, it is illegal to download or upload copyrighted works, >> the concept of file sharing and actual file sharing is not illegal. I >> do not condone illegal file sharing, but am just trying to clarify a >> few things. >> The MPAA (and RIAA) have not and will not target individual >> downloaders. There is no real way to get them. They are not a law >> enforcement agency. They cannot entrap individual users. If you >> download from them, and they are the rightful owners, then there is no >> law broken, even if it is widely know that the service being used is >> to illegally obtain files. Plus having downloaded one file will not be >> worthwhile anyway in court. Statutory copyright infringement penalty, $30,000 per occurrence. Each making of a copy is a separate violation. Don't _bet_ on it not being worthwhile in court. You can't afford to be _right_, let alone wrong. (A _successful_ infringement defense typically runs into six figures left of the decimal point.) Particularly, an 'association' is _not_ looking to 'make money' from the lawsuit -- their primary aim is the 'chilling effect', as it were, of the successful prosecution. The _smaller_ the perp that is successfully prosecuted, the stronger the message that is 'sent', regarding the 'risk' of such actions. >> [[., munch ..]] > I heard somewhere that those caught could receive not only fines, but > jail time-is this true? > [TELECOM Digest Editor's Note: It would not suprise me at all. Nor > does it surprise me that they just toss out lawsuits all over the > place without even having the *name* or *any identity* of the persons > they intend to sue. I can see where 'John Doe' might be a valid way > to sue someone you had caught when you could not otherwise get his > name, but lawsuits at random against John Does 1 through 9999 (fill > in the names, addresses and particulars when you find the person) > seems to me to be a gross abuse of the legal system. But they seem to > be setting out the lawsuits, then finding the person later on and > already having the suit set up. Not a good faith thing, IMO. PAT] Not surprisingly, our esteemed moderator doesn't understand the process. They've _already_ got the IP address, and timestamp, data, and all the 'downloading' evidence to support the suit. But they don't know _who_ was using that IP address at that time. And the ISP's will -not- divulge *that* information except by court order. Hence the John Doe filing. followed by a subpoena to the ISP. Followed by an 'amended' filing to insert the actual perpetrators name. Then, and *ONLY*THEN* can you 'serve' the perp with the summons for the lawsuit. Any _given_ "John Doe" is alleged to have committed _specific_ acts -- e.g., "at this specific date/time, did download thus-and-such movie from IP address aa.bb.cc.dd to xx.yy.zz.ww" You can't file the suit, -then- go find some *other* violations, and change the allegations in pre-existing suit to match. As to the prior poster's question regarding jail time -- the answer is "yes". The "Digital Millennium Copyright Act" _did_ introduce *criminal* prosecution and penalties for certain kinds of copyright infringement. In general, the criminal provisions deal with those who _distribute_, for money or otherwise, infringing copies. [TELECOM Digest Editor's Note: But many IP addresses are not static, but dynamic. What do they do then to find the person who 'stole' the movie or the piece of music? PAT] ------------------------------ Date: Fri, 19 Nov 2004 18:01:59 -0500 From: Marcus Didius Falco Subject: Re: The Complete Communicator At 05:36 PM 11/19/04, ama3@aol.com (A M Andrews) wrote about The Complete Communicator: > Looking for an answering/fax package for Win98 that is as good as the > proprietary Complete Communicator was [for Win3.1]. "Was" because it > seems to have disappeared -- and required its own modem. Everything > was excellent: voices, defaults, setup ... Tried downloads/trial > versions of others and setup is dreadful/non-intuitive, or worse, > freezes system; usual response from help is "modem problem". Looking > for basic telephone answering management package! For a fax package I used to use Norton's Winfax Pro. Nowadays I've pretty much stopped using faxes, so I didn't re-install it when I went to Win98SE. Direct replies are unlikely to be read. To reply use the address below: falco_marcus_didius yahoo.co.uk ------------------------------ Organization: Robert Bonomi Consulting Subject: Re: The Complete Communicator From: bonomi@host122.r-bonomi.com (Robert Bonomi) Date: Sat, 20 Nov 2004 01:22:49 +0000 In article , A M Andrews wrote: > Looking for an answering/fax package for Win98 that is as good as the > proprietary Complete Communicator was [for Win3.1]. "Was" because it > seems to have disappeared -- and required its own modem. Everything > was excellent: voices, defaults, setup ... Tried downloads/trial > versions of others and setup is dreadful/non-intuitive, or worse, > freezes system; usual response from help is "modem problem". Looking > for basic telephone answering management package! "The Complete PC", the company that made "The Complete Communicator" is long gone. Probably 10 years, now. Unfortunately. I've still got some of their cards. Note: if anybody has a "Complete PC" _fax_ scanner in working order, I'd be interested -- mine died a few months ago. There's a voice-mail / telephone answering package that comes bundled with Toshiba laptops, that is quite good, and easy to use. ------------------------------ Date: Fri, 19 Nov 2004 16:59:39 -0600 From: John Schmerold Subject: Off-Shore Call Centers I sent the following note to a Covad salesperson. Wouldn't it be great if we could convince every telecommunications manager to do the same! ------------------ "I will warn you at this point we won't consider Covad services unless I get a written guarantee backed up by penalty fees and contract termination rights. This guarantee will stipulate that if I ever get transferred to an overseas call center or to a call-center not staffed by native US staff, I am entitled to significant penalty payments and may terminate my contract with Covad. I've spent too much time on the phone talking to someone in India about a problem with one of my clients. Never again from now on, every agreement I sign will have this clause." John ------------------------------ Subject: Re: NEC IP Phone Works, One Way Organization: Robert Bonomi Consulting From: bonomi@host122.r-bonomi.com (Robert Bonomi) Date: Sat, 20 Nov 2004 01:04:59 +0000 In article , Anthony wrote: > Hey folks, > I am a bit lost, as this is my 1st go around with VoIP. I currently > have a NEC Electra IPK system w/ the VoIP card, etc. > I set the unit up today, and uploaded the latest firmware to the > card. I took the phone to one of my satellite offices about 40 miles > away from the PBX. I got the systems to connect, I can check > voicemail, get an outside line, and page, however nobody can hear > anything that I say, however I can hear the other end w/ the PBX > absolutely fine. > I've blown away the settings on both the card, and on the phone, and > nothing I am doing is working. Is there something I am missing here? > Is there a specific set of ports I need to open on either firewall? I > have the phones set on the DMZ ip's, so all ports apparently are > opened. > Any help would be appreciated. TURN ON LOGGING OF DROPPED PACKETS ON *BOTH* FIREWALLS. See 'who is dropping what'. One of them will be dropping a sh*tload of packets going toward the main office. Probably UDP protocol stuff. ------------------------------ From: Internet Oracle Subject: Re: USOC, SLDC, and FID Concepts Organization: We Date: Sat, 20 Nov 2004 01:56:33 +0000 In article , Matt wrote: > I tried to search for info. on USOC, SLDC, and FID, but couldn't find > useful info. Can anyone gives me some definitions, or URL for those > info.? > Thanks!! USOC 'Universal Soldier' Operational Charter SLDC Submarine Launched Data Center FID Ferro-resonant Intermodulation Distortion You owe the Internet Oracle two ..... (oops. nevermind, wrong group) see also: ------------------------------ Organization: Robert Bonomi Consulting Subject: Re: Somewhat Off Topic But a Must Read From: bonomi@host122.r-bonomi.com (Robert Bonomi) Date: Sat, 20 Nov 2004 02:09:46 +0000 In article TELECOM Digest Editor noted: > [TELECOM Digest Editor's Note: K-Mart (remember when it used to be > the 'dime store' Kresge's?) and Sears (remember when it used to be > known as 'Sears and Roebuck' ?) in fact have merged. Walmart is not > at all pleased about it. PAT] FACT: K-Mart was *never* Kresge's. K-Mart and Kresge's existed simultaneously. Yes, K-Mart was owned by the parent of the Kresge's stores -- and was set up to compete in the 'discount store' niche (i.e. against _Target_). Kresge's competed against Woolworths, and the other full-line retail-only (no catalog mail-order/phone-order sales) department stores. Also, Sears and K-Mart have _not_ yet merged. Management has made a deal to do so. It still requires (a) stockholder approval by _both_ companies, and (b) regulatory approval. Neither of those approvals is a sure thing. ------------------------------ From: Ed Clarke Subject: Re: EFF: Anti-Spam Measures Block Free Speech Date: 20 Nov 2004 02:18:15 GMT Organization: Ciliophora Associates, Inc. Reply-To: clarke@cilia.org In article , Barry Margolin wrote: >> This is absolutely on purpose. Collateral Damage is a necessary >> technique to rid the net of spammers. If you give money to a company >> that facilitates spamming then you are no better than a spammer. Move >> the damn website to an IP range owned by a company that does not spam. >> Let the spam supporting service providers go broke because they have >> no customers. > Where does it say that this is the reason why MoveOn.org's mail is > being blocked? One of the other problems that the white paper > mentioned is mailers that assume that any bulk email is spam -- but > legitimate mailing lists will necessarily send out bulk email. They are on abovenet. Abovenet is listed (twice) in SPEWS and also in SPAMBAG. There's a whole blacklist just dedicated to abovenet: above.blackholes.us This does not bode well for connectivity to moveon.org. MoveOn.org is a specific case that I had not looked up before you mentioned them. My posting refers to collateral damage as a valid antispam technique in the general case. ------------------------------ From: Wesrock@aol.com Date: Fri, 19 Nov 2004 21:59:03 EST Subject: Re: What Wal-Mart Knows About Customers' Habits In a message dated 19 Nov 2004 11:06:13 -0800, hancock4@bbs.cpcn.com (Lisa Hancock) writes: > Telecom editor wrote: >> ... in 1963, I was employed by the fund raising committee to build a >> new McCormick YWCA ... one of the guests at the luncheon was Myrtle >> Walgreen, ... she reached in her purse and pulled out a check for >> **fifty thousand dollars** > I presume by that time the Walgreen chain had started and was > properous. Walgreen's had a very busy store (complete with lunch counter and soda fountain) in downtown Oklahoma City certainly in the early 1940s, and it wasn't new then. That was when downtown was the principal business area, and the first suburban shopping center had been opened on N.W. 10th Street, 10 blocks north of downtown. The nearest Wal-Mart supercenter to me today is at N.W. 136th Street, a couple of miles from where I live. Wes Leatherock wesrock@aol.com wleathus@yahoo.com [TELECOM Digest Editor's Note: The two principal Walgreen's stores in downtown Chicago (Randolph and State Street, also two blocks south at Madison and State Street) were both active stores with lunch counters and basement cafeterias as well during the 1940's also. Like today, there are/were five or six Walgreens stores in the downtown Chicago area, but none of them have lunch counters or cafeterias any longer. The two Woolworth dime stores in downtown Chicago (almost directly across the street from each other on State Street) still have their restaurant things however. Lisa Hancock also noted in her message on this that some corporations could be quite generous with their money and the one in Chicago in those days which comes to mind for me was the phone company. During the early/middle 1960's, Dr. Martin Luther King was a regular guest preacher both at Chicago Temple on Sunday mornings and at Sunday Evening Club at Orchestra Hall. I always went to hear him speak and meet him each time he was in town, usually three or four times per year. Both at the Chicago Temple and at the Sunday Evening Club they *always* made a point of printing in the program words to the effect, "The personal expenses of Dr. and Mrs. King on this visit to Chicago and the honorarium for his message to us were met with a gift from the Illinois Bell Telephone Company." And Dr. King did not come cheap as a speaker, either. Temple paid him five hundred dollars to speak and I think Sunday Evening Club did the same, always through Illinois Bell which was a very generous, good corporation. PAT] ------------------------------ From: robertbell@erols.com (RobertPlattBell) Subject: Last Laugh! Re: Texas Officials Wary of Plan to Hunt by Internet Date: 19 Nov 2004 14:04:55 -0800 Organization: http://groups.google.com You think Internet HUNTING is bad? Take the concept to its logical conclusion ... (some fun with cut and paste techniques). By Jeff Franks HOUSTON (Reuters) - Killers soon may be able to sit at their computers and blast away at people in an unnamed third-world country via the Internet, a prospect that has human rights activists up in arms. A controversial Web site, http://www.live-shot.com, already offers target practice with a .22 caliber rifle and could soon let Killers shoot at women and children, site creator John Underwood said on Tuesday. U.S. Government officials are not quite sure what to make of Underwood's Web site, but may tweak existing laws to make sure Internet killing does not get out of hand. "This is the first one I've seen," said senior FBI agent Mike Berger. "The current state statutes don't cover this sort of thing." Underwood, an estimator for a San Antonio, Texas auto body shop, has invested $10,000 to build a platform for a rifle and camera that can be remotely aimed on his 330-acre (133-hectare) estate located in an undisclosed third-world country, by anyone on the Internet anywhere in the world. The idea came last year while viewing another Web site on which cameras posted in in various third-world countries are used to snap photos of people. "We were looking at a beautiful young Hispanic girl and my friend said 'If you just had a gun for that.' A little light bulb went off in my head," he said. Internet killing could be popular with the disabled unable to get out of the house who still want to experience a "thrill kill", or for those who cannot afford a trip to third-world countries to commit murders, Underwood said. Berger said state law only covers "regulated people" such as U.S. Citizens within the United States and cannot prevent Underwood from offering Internet kills of "unregulated" people such as foreigners located in distant lands. He has proposed a rule that will come up for public discussion in January that anyone killing people via Internet, even if the victim is in a foreign land, could be tried for murder in the State. Berger expressed reservations about remote control killing, but noted that humans have always adopted new technologies to kill. "First it was rocks and clubs, then we sharpened it and put it on a stick. Then there was the bow and arrow, black powder, smokeless power and optics," Berger said. "Maybe this is the next technological step out there." Underwood, 39, said he will offer human killing as soon as he gets a fast Internet connection to his third world estate that will enable killers to aim the rifle quickly at passing people. He said an attendant would retrieve shot people for the shooters, who could have the heads preserved by a taxidermist. They could also have the meat processed and shipped home, or donated to orphanages. ------------------------------ TELECOM Digest is an electronic journal devoted mostly but not exclusively to telecommunications topics. It is circulated anywhere there is email, in addition to various telecom forums on a variety of networks such as Compuserve and America On Line, Yahoo Groups, and other forums. It is also gatewayed to Usenet where it appears as the moderated newsgroup 'comp.dcom.telecom'. TELECOM Digest is a not-for-profit, mostly non-commercial educational service offered to the Internet by Patrick Townson. All the contents of the Digest are compilation-copyrighted. You may reprint articles in some other media on an occasional basis, but please attribute my work and that of the original author. Contact information: Patrick Townson/TELECOM Digest Post Office Box 50 Independence, KS 67301 Phone: 620-402-0134 Fax 1: 775-255-9970 Fax 2: 530-309-7234 Fax 3: 208-692-5145 Email: editor@telecom-digest.org Subscribe: telecom-subscribe@telecom-digest.org Unsubscribe:telecom-unsubscribe@telecom-digest.org This Digest is the oldest continuing e-journal about telecomm- unications on the Internet, having been founded in August, 1981 and published continuously since then. Our archives are available for your review/research. We believe we are the oldest e-zine/mailing list on the internet in any category! URL information: http://telecom-digest.org Anonymous FTP: mirror.lcs.mit.edu/telecom-archives/archives/ (or use our mirror site: ftp.epix.net/pub/telecom-archives) Email <==> FTP: telecom-archives@telecom-digest.org Send a simple, one line note to that automated address for a help file on how to use the automatic retrieval system for archives files. You can get desired files in email. ************************************************************************* * TELECOM Digest is partially funded by a grant from * * Judith Oppenheimer, President of ICB Inc. and purveyor of accurate * * 800 & Dot Com News, Intelligence, Analysis, and Consulting. * * http://ICBTollFree.com, http://1800TheExpert.com * * Views expressed herein should not be construed as representing * * views of Judith Oppenheimer or ICB Inc. * ************************************************************************* ICB Toll Free News. Contact information is not sold, rented or leased. One click a day feeds a person a meal. Go to http://www.thehungersite.com Copyright 2004 ICB, Inc. and TELECOM Digest. All rights reserved. Our attorney is Bill Levant, of Blue Bell, PA. ************************ DIRECTORY ASSISTANCE JUST 65 CENTS ONE OR TWO INQUIRIES CHARGED TO YOUR CREDIT CARD! REAL TIME, UP TO DATE! SPONSORED BY TELECOM DIGEST AND EASY411.COM SIGN UP AT http://www.easy411.com/telecomdigest ! ************************ --------------------------------------------------------------- Finally, the Digest is funded by gifts from generous readers such as yourself who provide funding in amounts deemed appropriate. Your help is important and appreciated. A suggested donation of fifty dollars per year per reader is considered appropriate. See our address above. Please make at least a single donation to cover the cost of processing your name to the mailing list. All opinions expressed herein are deemed to be those of the author. Any organizations listed are for identification purposes only and messages should not be considered any official expression by the organization. End of TELECOM Digest V23 #557 ****************************** From editor@telecom-digest.org Sat Nov 20 18:27:57 2004 Received: (from ptownson@localhost) by massis.lcs.mit.edu (8.11.6p3/8.11.6) id iAKNRvn10326; Sat, 20 Nov 2004 18:27:57 -0500 (EST) Date: Sat, 20 Nov 2004 18:27:57 -0500 (EST) From: editor@telecom-digest.org Message-Id: <200411202327.iAKNRvn10326@massis.lcs.mit.edu> X-Authentication-Warning: massis.lcs.mit.edu: ptownson set sender to editor@telecom-digest.org using -f To: ptownson Approved: patsnewlist Subject: TELECOM Digest V23 #558 TELECOM Digest Sat, 20 Nov 2004 18:27:00 EST Volume 23 : Issue 558 Inside This Issue: Editor: Patrick A. Townson Re: Trial Shows How Spammers Operate (jdj) Re: Should I Put Cell Phone on National do Not Call List? (D. Burstein) Re: Movie Studios to Sue Internet File Traders (Dave Garland) Re: Movie Studios to Sue Internet File Traders (Lee Hollaar) Re: Off-Shore Call Centers (John Schmerold & John Levine email) Re: Somewhat Off Topic But a Must Read (Wesrock@aol.com) Re: What Wal-Mart Knows About Customers' Habits (Tony P.) Re: EFF: Anti-Spam Measures Block Free Speech (John Levine) Re: Sears and K-Mart (Stanley Cline) Re: Mystery Phone Number Revisited (John R. Covert) The Pitfalls of VOIP (Lisa Minter) SBC Seeks to Levy Higher Fees on Internet Phone Companies (Lisa Minter) All contents here are copyrighted by Patrick Townson and the individual writers/correspondents. Articles may be used in other journals or newsgroups, provided the writer's name and the Digest are included in the fair use quote. By using -any name or email address- included herein for -any- reason other than responding to an article herein, you agree to pay a hundred dollars to the recipients of the email. =========================== Addresses herein are not to be added to any mailing list, nor to be sold or given away without explicit written consent. Chain letters, viruses, porn, spam, and miscellaneous junk are definitely unwelcome. We must fight spam for the same reason we fight crime: not because we are naive enough to believe that we will ever stamp it out, but because we do not want the kind of world that results when no one stands against crime. Geoffrey Welsh =========================== See the bottom of this issue for subscription and archive details and the name of our lawyer; other stuff of interest. ---------------------------------------------------------------------- From: jdj Subject: Re: Trial Shows How Spammers Operate Date: Fri, 19 Nov 2004 21:30:57 -0800 Organization: Posted via Supernews, http://www.supernews.com On Wed, 17 Nov 2004 03:12:34 -0500, Dan Lanciani wrote: > Interesting. I didn't realize that this was considered a bad thing. There are a lot of people who equate receiving spam to stepping in what the cat leaves on the lawn. It makes them all kinds of upset when someone suggests doing something other than killing received spam. > My filters respond to every (seemingly) spam message with a note > indicating how to bypass the filter if in fact the mail is not spam. > (Actually they do this only once per sender per some months, but you > get the idea.) I really can't just dump (seeming) spam in the bucket > since there are a few false positives. But I get 1500+ spams per day > and I can't look at them all. Chances are that your filters are sending responses to forged addresses. Occasionally I see messages like that and they are treated like spam, since they have nothing to do with me and responding to them is useless. They go to /dev/null. Until it's full. >> There is an added benefit if spam to bad addresses were responded to: >> the bad addresses are confirmed valid and permanently taint the >> databases, which get sold around and the fun starts all over again. > Because of the way my filters are integrated into sendmail they > generate responses for spam sent to bad addresses. I always > considered this a bug (though at least I fixed it to send only one > response to envelopes with multiple bad to: addresses :) but I'm glad > to hear it may do some good. I've noticed lately that spammers will > make many simultaneous connections to my mail server and run through > huge lists of bogus recipients. This was overwhelming my system until > I added a semaphore for spamassassin use and queued most of the > responses. Do they think I'm an ISP or such? I should have made it clear that I was not talking about replying to mail. I meant responding by using the url's in the mail body. Since spammers never use a real From: address replying by mail is useless. Spammers hit every machine with an open smtp port. If your mail server accepts connections and even looks like it relays, it will be on spammer lists as a good relay. They don't care if nothing is actually delivered. >> Should not be too difficult to set up a procmail script for servers to >> send a few http requests to a spammer's website instead of bouncing >> mail with bad addresses. > Hmm. Maybe just send a SYN to each http:// address that can be > extracted from the mail. Though I guess that might not count against > the correct spammer if they are sharing IP addresses. A SYN would do nothing and with multiple SYNs being sent from all over the place it would probably be regarded as a dDOS attack. To be charged for a hit a page must be requested. So sending a SYN would cost the spammer nothing. But perhaps it should not be done. Spammers might get a little upset with all the responses and no one buying a thing. That might be compared to calling a ScumCorp's 800 number just to say "hi" every few minutes or trying an infinite number of times to send a fax or set up a 66baud data connection to said 800 number. Nevermind. It's a bad idea. Could get sued. But it's fun as gedankenspielen. ------------------------------ From: Danny Burstein Subject: Re: Should I Put Cell Phone on National do Not Call List? Date: Sat, 20 Nov 2004 05:35:55 UTC Organization: PANIX Public Access Internet and UNIX, NYC In Marcus Didius Falco writes: > Comments: While it's true that the major wireless phone providers > (with the sole exception of Verizon) have announced their intention to > compile a directory of customers' cell phone numbers, it isn't true > that they plan to "publish" said directory for all to see. The numbers > will be made available only if customers opt in, and will be > accessible only by those who call information and pay a fee. Err, not quite. See next comment; > Participating service providers swear the numbers will never be > available to telemarketers. while the actual combined (cellular company telco) directory may be reasonably restricted somehow or other, that does you absolutely NO GOOD if your cellular number is in other databases. Ever stop at East Cupcake Tire Repair and give them your name, address, and cellular number? Guess what. You're now in a searchable record. A very big and highly marketed one. > Meanwhile, the Federal Trade Commission does allow > http://urbanlegends.about.com/gi/dynamic/offsite.htm?site=https://www.donotcall.gov/FAQ/FAQConsumersNew.aspx > worried cell phone users to add their numbers to the National Do Not Call > or by calling 1-888-382-1222 . Good idea. While not perfect (I'm still waiting for the 10,000 volt kickback option to unwanted call makers) the list _does_ significantly reduce the numbers of calls. And, as the cost to comply with it gets higher and higher[a], fewer outgoing call centers will stay in business. [a] unless the telemarketers and their friends get Congress to relax it. And they're certainly trying. > Online registration: www.donotcall.gov _____________________________________________________ Knowledge may be power, but communications is the key dannyb@panix.com [to foil spammers, my address has been double rot-13 encoded] ------------------------------ From: Dave Garland Subject: Re: Movie Studios to Sue Internet File Traders Date: Sat, 20 Nov 2004 00:15:28 -0600 Organization: Wizard Information > [TELECOM Digest Editor's Note: But many IP addresses are not static, > but dynamic. What do they do then to find the person who 'stole' the > movie or the piece of music? PAT] They subpoena the information from the ISP. ISP logs will usually identify the particular customer. A few ISPs who are concerned with their customers' privacy have made a point of having a very short retention cycle for logs, sufficient for them to deal with abuse, but short enough so that the logs probably will be deleted before outsiders get it together to demand them. Those ISPs are worthy of patronage. ------------------------------ From: hollaar@faith.cs.utah.edu (Lee Hollaar) Subject: Re: Movie Studios to Sue Internet File Traders Date: Sat, 20 Nov 2004 13:14:38 +0000 (UTC) Organization: University of Utah Computer Science In article bonomi@host122.r-bonomi.com (Robert Bonomi) writes: > Statutory copyright infringement penalty, $30,000 per occurrence. Each > making of a copy is a separate violation. Not quite right. It's up to $30,000 PER WORK infringed, and up to $150,000 per work if the infringement is willful. The minimum is $750 per work, unless the infringement is completely innocent and then it is $200 per work. But that means that at the minimum for an innocent infringement of "sharing" 1000 songs is $200,000, and there is nothing that the judge can do about it. > As to the prior poster's question regarding jail time -- the answer is > "yes". The "Digital Millennium Copyright Act" _did_ introduce > *criminal* prosecution and penalties for certain kinds of copyright > infringement. In general, the criminal provisions deal with those who > _distribute_, for money or otherwise, infringing copies. Criminal infringement has been part of copyright law for over a century. The DMCA didn't change that. In fact, the only thing the DMCA did regarding criminal infringement is carry it over to the new anticircumvention provisions, with the same penalties. > [TELECOM Digest Editor's Note: But many IP addresses are not static, > but dynamic. What do they do then to find the person who 'stole' the > movie or the piece of music? PAT] The request is for the name of the user of the IP address at a specified time. If the ISP does not have that information because there are no logs of IP address assignment, it will indicate that to the court. But a misrepresentation to the court would lead to the ISP being held in contempt, with harsh penalties. Note that the current suits are against people providing movies or songs on the systems, not people who are only downloading them. That makes it easier to get their IP addresses, since it is used to contact the "sharer" to download the material. ------------------------------ Date: Sat, 20 Nov 2004 07:42:36 -0600 From: John Schmerold Subject: Re: Off-Shore Call Centers I agree Irish or UK agents are easier to understand than Indian agents OTOH, I have my doubts that it's that much cheaper to setup call centers in Ireland. If we're not successful with our efforts on the contract side perhaps it's time for legislative efforts, as a Libertarian kind of guy, it's the last thing I like to see - Governmental involvement, however the phone companies have exceeded my pain threshold with this call center issue. John Levine wrote: >> I get a written guarantee backed up by penalty fees and contract >> termination rights. This guarantee will stipulate that if I ever get >> transferred to an overseas call center or to a call-center not staffed >> by native US staff, ... > A company I'm associated with moved its tech support call center to > Befast, Northern Ireland some years ago. We've been able to recruit > very well qualified staff and callers have been happy with the > service. It's not as cheap as India (although we did get some UK > government money to set it up), but it's a lot easier to manage. > I suppose it helps that for most Americans, an Irish accent is easier > to understand than an Indian one. What's the solution? I don't shop at Sam's or Wal-mart unless I'm desperate for something I know I can't find anywhere else, or I know there's a 50% price spread. I am fully aware that my friendly Dierberg's, Walgreen's or Kmart is 20% more than Wal-Mart, I'm content with that and happy to pay the money for mental peace of mind. The problem is, when I need SBC DSL support, I have no choice. I can't say "charge me $20 so I don't have to talk to an Indian" John Schmerold Katy Computer Systems, Inc 20 Meramec Station Rd Valley Park MO 63088 636-861-6900 v 775-227-6947 f John R Levine said: >> I agree Irish or UK agents are easier to understand than Indian agents >> OTOH, I have my doubts that it's that much cheaper to setup call centers >> in Ireland. > It's Northern Ireland, which makes a difference. Between the gov't > subsidies and the very reasonable salaries that comp sci grads will > accept, the cost difference is significant. >> If we're not successful with our efforts on the contract side >> perhaps it's time for legislative efforts, as a Libertarian kind of >> guy, > I dunno, I fear it's a cultural thing. The Wal-Mart phenomenon > makes it clear that most Americans will pick lower price over better > quality every time. > I get a written guarantee backed up by penalty fees and contract > termination rights. This guarantee will stipulate that if I ever get > transferred to an overseas call center or to a call-center not staffed > by native US staff, ... A company I'm associated with moved its tech support call center to Befast, Northern Ireland some years ago. We've been able to recruit very well qualified staff and callers have been happy with the service. It's not as cheap as India (although we did get some UK government money to set it up), but it's a lot easier to manage. I suppose it helps that for most Americans, an Irish accent is easier to understand than an Indian one. > What's the solution? Good question. I don't shop at Wal-Mart at all, and my telco's support staff are three blocks from here and know me personally. > The problem is, when I need SBC DSL support, I have no choice. I can't say > "charge me $20 so I don't have to talk to an Indian" I suppose one small step would be to write to your congressbeings and Mike "princeling" Powell to tell them how unhappy you are that they've let the RBOCs monopolize DSL. Regards, John Levine johnl@iecc.com Primary Perpetrator of The Internet for Dummies, Information Superhighwayman wanna-be, http://iecc.com/johnl, Mayor "I dropped the toothpaste", said Tom, crestfallenly. [TELECOM Digest Editor's Note: Do you remember how, many years ago at least, or maybe still, telemarketers always wanted to locate their offices in Omaha, Nebraska? Not only were the phone lines cheaper there than anywhere else when WATS was prevalent (almost no calls had to be made through the most expensive 'Band 6' lines; 'Band 5' went almost everywhere except extremely distant areas) but more important the telemarketers wanted that nice, bland, midwestern accent so the called party knew a 'voice' was speaking to him, but it was impossible to say immediatly *where* the voice was located, or the person's racial makeup without an accent, which white people in the midwest area usually do not have. That's why the telemarketers did not want to locate in the east due to prejudice against 'easterners' by people in the midwest, or against jews or blacks (populous in the eastern states); telemarketers did not want to locate in the south due to prejudice by midwesterners or eastern people against 'southerners' (whose accent would always give them away, etc). They would always say it was hard enough to make sales pitches over the phone without having to overcome the called party's prejudice against black people, Jews, southerners, whatever. So don't even give the called party a chance to think about those factors, just be a 'voice'. That's what made Nebraska in general, and Omaha in particular such a nice place for them; plus which the farmer's wives and daughters tended to work more cheaply and be more honest in rural midwestern areas as Amoco Credit Card found out when they moved their operation from Chicago to a rural area outside of Des Moines, Iowa. I guess the opposite is true where customer service is concerned, however. Now that you have been sold and they have your money, they can quit worrying about what you think either way; go ahead and let customer service be outsourced to India or Japan or Korea. If the housewives and daughters over there cannot understand your problem or you cannot understand their language, then so what; let the customer live with the problem; we already got his money. PAT] ------------------------------ From: Wesrock@aol.com Date: Sat, 20 Nov 2004 09:38:42 EST Subject: Re: Somewhat Off Topic But a Must Read In a message dated Sat, 20 Nov 2004 02:09:46 +0000, bonomi@host122.r-bonomi.com (Robert Bonomi) writes: > K-Mart was *never* Kresge's. > K-Mart and Kresge's existed simultaneously. > Yes, K-Mart was owned by the parent of the Kresge's stores -- and > was set up to compete in the 'discount store' niche (i.e. against > _Target_). Kresge's competed against Woolworths, and the other > full-line retail-only (no catalog mail-order/phone-order sales) > department stores. Woolworth's had Woolco discount stores. May Department Stores had Venture. There were other discount chains before them which have disappeared. Target was probably not a principal competitor for K-mart at that time, just one of many competitors in the field. (A Target store in Oklahoma City now occupies the building once used by one of those long-departed chains.) I remember Kresge's as well as K-mart. There was a considerable overlap in merchandise, as there is today between discount stores and the few remaining "five-and-ten cent" stores. Target was not a major player then. The S.S. Kresge Company eventually changed the corporate name to K-mart. Target, originally an operation of Dayton-Hudson Corporation which owned a variety of traditional department stores, became a survivor and profitable ... so profitable that Dayton-Hudson changed its name to Target Corporation and then earlier this year sold off its prestigious department stores and its junior department stores. Wes Leatherock wesrock@aol.com wleathus@yahoo.com [TELECOM Digest Editor's Note: And don't forget Bloomingdale's Department Store in New York City. Diner's Club credit card had its origin as the internal store credit department of Bloomingdale's in the 1930-40 era. Alfred Bloomingdale, owner of the department store bearing his name was the first Chairman of the Board of Diner's Club when the two credit functions were split apart around 1950 or so. PAT] ------------------------------ From: Tony P. Subject: Re: What Wal-Mart Knows About Customers' Habits Organization: ATCC Date: Sat, 20 Nov 2004 12:29:38 -0500 In article , dold@XReXXWhatX.usenet.us.com says: >> [TELECOM Digest Editor's Note: There was a K-Mart in >> the complex where Walmart is located; Walmart drove them out of >> business two years ago. > In Napa, California, there was a very old KMart store in a "strip > mall" with a few other stores. The Lucky's grocery store closed when > Alpha Beta bought Lucky's, and they kept a store open a couple of > blocks away. > KMart wanted to expand, opening one of their newer Super-KMarts, > taking over the Lucky's space. Napa said no. They didn't want the > expansion. They wanted another store to move in to Lucky's. > KMart closed the store as too small and too old for their new network. > The other little shops closed without the major draws in the shopping > center. > Six months later, Walmart razed the entire strip mall and built a new > store that encompassed more square footage than the entire complex had > before, and they are the sole store in the complex. > Did Napa make a mistake, and decide to take an offer from Walmart? > Had they already received the offer from Walmart before KMart asked? > I was surprised that Walmart would put a store in Napa, since there > was already one in American Canyon, 14 miles away. Since then, they > have applied for a move of the American Canyon store to a larger > position 3 miles closer to Napa. > Other stores can stay in business, but only in little tiny niches. No > one can compete with Walmart. A new move by Walmart will leave > merchandise in the inventory of the supplier until it is sold. $60 > billion will disappear from Walmart books. This would really be "just > in time". It would never belong to Walmart. It would be sold > directly from the distributor to the consumer at the Walmart checkout. So they're acting as a consignment vendor. How interesting. > I think that is how Amazon.com operates with some of their suppliers, > but they don't have physical control of the item, it remains with the > distributor, who might route it elsewhere. In the Walmart case, it > wouldn't be available for other use by the distributor. > Clarence A Dold - Hidden Valley (Lake County) CA USA 38.8-122.5 > [TELECOM Digest Editor's Note: Distance between stores is not an issue > for Walmart. In addition to ours here, they have another one in > Coffeyville, and others throughout southeast Kansas. PAT] Distance has nothing to do with location of stores period. In Boston there are two CVS stores directly across the street from each other. Granted, it's a busy street and the reasoning is that people don't have to cross the street to get to CVS. It is all about capturing as much of the market as you can. In article , Wesrock@aol.com says: > Lisa Hancock also noted in her message on this that some corporations > could be quite generous with their money and the one in Chicago in > those days which comes to mind for me was the phone company. During > the early/middle 1960's, Dr. Martin Luther King was a regular guest > preacher both at Chicago Temple on Sunday mornings and at Sunday > Evening Club at Orchestra Hall. I always went to hear him speak and > meet him each time he was in town, usually three or four times per > year. Both at the Chicago Temple and at the Sunday Evening Club they > *always* made a point of printing in the program words to the effect, > "The personal expenses of Dr. and Mrs. King on this visit to Chicago > and the honorarium for his message to us were met with a gift from the > Illinois Bell Telephone Company." And Dr. King did not come cheap as > a speaker, either. Temple paid him five hundred dollars to speak and > I think Sunday Evening Club did the same, always through Illinois Bell > which was a very generous, good corporation. PAT] That was part of the mission of the BOC's at the time. Support the community in order to maintain that protected monopoly status. On the whole, only now am I paying less for voice communications than I did in 1982. Of course I've ditched circuit for packet so that might be part of it. Right now I'm shelling $100 for cable, Internet and phone per month, the phone representing $24.99 of that. I really can't complain as the phone is unlimited local and ld, has ALL the features I want and works fairly well. Cox Communications tends to be generous with the communities they serve. But they have no choice -- they are a protected monopoly to some degree. [TELECOM Digest Editor's Note: Is Cox Communications the same thing as Cox Cable? Assuming that it is, Cox has the southern end of our Montgomery County (Coffeyville, Caney, Tryo and Dearing) while Cable One has Independence, and communities in the north area including Neodesha, Liberty, Sycamore, etc. And Cable One at least is rather generous (or maybe the terms of the franchise make them be generous) in giving Independence *three* cable channels for community use. Channel 10 is general community programming, Channel 14 is for the Independence High School and our Community College, and Channel 22 is for general use by City of Independence for announcements and meetings of the town board, etc. PAT] ------------------------------ Date: 20 Nov 2004 06:40:31 -0000 From: John Levine Subject: Re: EFF: Anti-Spam Measures Block Free Speech Organization: I.E.C.C., Trumansburg NY USA > Where does it say that this is the reason why MoveOn.org's mail is > being blocked? Moveon has dreadful list management practices. I've seen lots of cases where they sent mail to addresses that couldn't possibly have signed up, inbound-only role accounts and the like. Although I generally agree with their politics, it's clear to me that they have only themselves to blame for getting into spam lists, and they would do themselves a favor if they'd spend less time spreading conspiracy theories and more time fixing their mail practices. I haven't been able to figure out why the EFF is so totally unable to understand e-mail. I talked to Cindy Cohn at the FTC spam meeting last year and Annalee Newitz at the authentication forum a few weeks ago, and it was quite clear they've learned nothing, and a lot of what they think they know is wrong. Arguments about "every user should have full control over his own inbox" ignore the realities of the way that spam filters work and the substantial extra cost involved were an ISP to provide per-user filtering granulatity. Annalee said she hand sorts 2000 spams a day from her inbox, and apparently believes that this is a productive use of her time. Go figure. John R. Levine, IECC, POB 727, Trumansburg NY 14886 +1 607 330 5711 johnl@iecc.com, Mayor, http://johnlevine.com, Member, Provisional board, Coalition Against Unsolicited Commercial E-mail ------------------------------ From: Stanley Cline Subject: Re: Sears and K-Mart Date: Sat, 20 Nov 2004 02:25:31 -0500 Organization: Roamer1 Communications Reply-To: sc1-news@roamer1.org On 19 Nov 2004 11:50:34 -0800, hancock4@bbs.cpcn.com (Lisa Hancock) wrote: > My local carrier, Verizon, is running the same risk of becomming too > distant from the people it serves. Years ago they had business > offices in regions, several throughout a big city. Today when you > call them (they no longer accomodate in-person visits) your call can What's strange is that the lack of walk-in offices is pretty much a Bell/GTE-only thing; practically every phone company that is not one of Verizon, SBC, BellSouth, or Qwest -- *including* the very large multi-state independents like Sprint LTD, ALLTEL, CenturyTel, and Frontier -- has at least some walk-in offices. I wonder what the Bells are so afraid of that non-Bells aren't ... Stanley Cline -- sc1 at roamer1 dot org -- http://www.roamer1.org/ "Never put off until tomorrow what you can do today. There might be a law against it by that time." -/usr/games/fortune ------------------------------ Date: Sat, 20 Nov 2004 04:30:01 EST From: John R. Covert Subject: Re: Mystery Phone Number Revisited Mr. Salvatore Petrarca wrote to the Digest after doing some research into the number 866 383-0986 and finding that it apparently belongs to Media Direct Marketing Consultants in Knoxville. This caused me to review caller id logs for the four lines on which I retain that information (all of which are answered by machines). I noticed that there were three calls from that number, each to different numbers. Mr. Petrarca surmised that spyware might have picked this up. However, since I operate under the firm conviction that "Friends Don't Let Friends Drive Windows", and since all of the three numbers are unlisted and are rarely if ever revealed to anyone at all, I don't think that's what's up. Instead, I think that the company behind this number is simply war dialling. I note that tonight it is no longer answering at the Indian shop. Here is a list of all calls from 800 Service numbers with an indication of what I get tonight. 20-FEB-2003 17:09:22.48 Fax 800 379-8414 Reorder 25-SEP-2003 12:03:19.21 Ln1 800 839-5031 DME Telephony Services 26-SEP-2003 19:24:02.84 Ln1 800 839-5031 18-FEB-2004 12:17:26.73 Ln2 866 383-0986 Mystery Phone Number 26-JUN-2004 20:08:56.06 Fax 866 383-0986 14-JUL-2004 19:33:44.81 Ln1 866 383-0986 15-SEP-2004 09:32:00.97 Ln2 800 497-9512 Direct Satellite 15-SEP-2004 10:34:14.52 Fax 800 497-9512 25-OCT-2004 13:55:57.43 Ln3 800 290-7432 AOL 26-OCT-2004 15:21:32.32 Ln3 800 290-7432 27-OCT-2004 15:31:22.90 Ln3 800 290-7432 28-OCT-2004 12:11:19.90 Ln3 800 290-7432 8-NOV-2004 11:59:56.68 Fax 800 682-0393 "Customer Service" None of the calls to the Fax number were faxes. Here is the fax log for those calls: Answered Phone : Thu, Feb 20, 2003 17:09:26 NMBR = 8003798414 Error : -6002, Answered, No Facsimile Machine Responded. Elapsed Time of Transmission : 1 min, 33 sec ....................................................... Answered Phone : Sat, Jun 26, 2004 20:09:00 NMBR = 8663830986 Error : -6002, Answered, No Facsimile Machine Responded. Elapsed Time of Transmission : 1 min, 32 sec ....................................................... Answered Phone : Wed, Sep 15, 2004 10:34:18 NMBR = 8004979512 Error : -6002, Answered, No Facsimile Machine Responded. Elapsed Time of Transmission : 1 min, 33 sec ....................................................... Answered Phone : Mon, Nov 8, 2004 12:00:00 NMBR = 8006820393 Error : -6002, Answered, No Facsimile Machine Responded. Elapsed Time of Transmission : 1 min, 32 sec ....................................................... A further search of the fax log reveals that in every case where I have an 800 service number in the "Received Station Message", the calling fax spammer has sent the call "Out of Area", that is, the 800 number in the station message is not in the caller id. 11-MAR-2003 08:09:03.89 Fax OUT OF AREA Answered Phone : Tue, Mar 11, 2003 08:09:07 Received Station Message : WSREPORT 8662046541 30-JUL-2003 09:37:56.86 Fax OUT OF AREA Answered Phone : Wed, Jul 30, 2003 09:38:00 Received Station Message : 18007307253 18-MAY-2004 07:16:16.63 Fax OUT OF AREA Answered Phone : Tue, May 18, 2004 07:16:20 Received Station Message : 18887623345 6-AUG-2004 07:42:17.69 Fax OUT OF AREA Answered Phone : Fri, Aug 6, 2004 07:42:21 Received Station Message : 18884495207 21-OCT-2004 09:43:19.68 Fax OUT OF AREA Answered Phone : Thu, Oct 21, 2004 09:43:23 Received Station Message : 18884495207 10-NOV-2004 08:40:07.74 Fax OUT OF AREA Answered Phone : Wed, Nov 10, 2004 08:40:11 Received Station Message : 18884495207 /john ------------------------------ From: Lisa Minter Date: Sat, 20 Nov 2004 11:32:50 -0500 Subject: The Pitfalls of VoIP Jack Decker note: Lately the press has been spreading a lot of FUD (fear, uncertainty, doubt) about VoIP. I have heard that some phone companies have been known to spend more advertising dollars with publishers and broadcasters that run stories favorable to them, and negative toward any perceived competition. I'm not saying there's any such quid pro quo in the case of this specific story, just that the increase in negative stories about VoIP in the press has me wondering. http://www.komando.com/kolumns_show.asp?showID=8068 The Pitfalls of VoIP by Kim Komando - 11/22/2004 Using your computer and Internet connection to make local and long distance calls has been getting a lot of attention lately. People are enticed by the savings offered by Voice over Internet Protocol (VoIP) and the ability to use a regular telephone. Before you jump on the bandwagon, consider the drawbacks. Most VoIP providers charge a monthly fee of $20 to $30 for unlimited local and long distance calling anywhere in the U.S., and sometimes Canada. You also receive a host of features that would normally cost extra, such as call forwarding, voice mail, caller ID and call waiting. There are enhanced features, too. Many providers will forward your voice mail to an e-mail account. There is a super version of call-forwarding that forwards calls to five or so different phones. It will ring them one at a time or all five simultaneously. Although VoIP is still in its infancy, there are a number of companies providing service, such as AT&T, (http://www.usa.att.com/callvantage/index.jsp), Packet8 (http://www.packet8.net/), VoicePulse (http://www.voicepulse.com/) and Vonage (http://www.vonage.com/). The quality is better than a cell phone and often matches traditional phone service. But there is a potential for dropouts similar to a cell phone. http://www.komando.com/kolumns_show.asp?showID=8068 ------------------------------ From: Lisa Minter Date: Sat, 20 Nov 2004 11:36:26 -0500 Subject: SBC Seeks to Levy Higher Fees On Internet Phone Companies http://www.interesting-people.org/archives/interesting-people/200411/msg00226.html Plan Aims to Raise Charges On Local-Network Calls; Bell to Tap Web Market, Too By ANNE MARIE SQUEO Staff Reporter of THE WALL STREET JOURNAL Even as SBC Communications Inc. announced the broad rollout of its Internet-based phone service, the telecom giant appears to be attempting a regulatory maneuver that would let it levy higher fees on rival Internet phone companies. SBC plans to file a new tariff with the Federal Communications Commission that potentially increases the fees paid by Internet service providers for calls completed on the company's local-phone network. While Internet calls largely avoid the traditional public-telephone network, they do connect to it when the recipient of the call isn't an Internet phone user. The tariff would go into effect immediately, and according to an earlier SBC filing, the company plans to have it in place as soon as tomorrow. The move could mark the first time a regional Bell phone giant has tried to assess higher fees -- traditionally levied on long-distance phone calls -- on Internet phone technologies. The situation has caught the attention of FCC Chairman Michael Powell, a staunch proponent of keeping the emerging Internet phone market free from heavy regulation. Senior FCC officials said Mr. Powell is concerned about the impact of SBC's plans and believes the proposal "may need substantial modifications." Full story at: http://www.interesting-people.org/archives/interesting-people/200411/msg00226.html ------------------------------ TELECOM Digest is an electronic journal devoted mostly but not exclusively to telecommunications topics. It is circulated anywhere there is email, in addition to various telecom forums on a variety of networks such as Compuserve and America On Line, Yahoo Groups, and other forums. It is also gatewayed to Usenet where it appears as the moderated newsgroup 'comp.dcom.telecom'. TELECOM Digest is a not-for-profit, mostly non-commercial educational service offered to the Internet by Patrick Townson. All the contents of the Digest are compilation-copyrighted. You may reprint articles in some other media on an occasional basis, but please attribute my work and that of the original author. Contact information: Patrick Townson/TELECOM Digest Post Office Box 50 Independence, KS 67301 Phone: 620-402-0134 Fax 1: 775-255-9970 Fax 2: 530-309-7234 Fax 3: 208-692-5145 Email: editor@telecom-digest.org Subscribe: telecom-subscribe@telecom-digest.org Unsubscribe:telecom-unsubscribe@telecom-digest.org This Digest is the oldest continuing e-journal about telecomm- unications on the Internet, having been founded in August, 1981 and published continuously since then. Our archives are available for your review/research. We believe we are the oldest e-zine/mailing list on the internet in any category! URL information: http://telecom-digest.org Anonymous FTP: mirror.lcs.mit.edu/telecom-archives/archives/ (or use our mirror site: ftp.epix.net/pub/telecom-archives) Email <==> FTP: telecom-archives@telecom-digest.org Send a simple, one line note to that automated address for a help file on how to use the automatic retrieval system for archives files. You can get desired files in email. ************************************************************************* * TELECOM Digest is partially funded by a grant from * * Judith Oppenheimer, President of ICB Inc. and purveyor of accurate * * 800 & Dot Com News, Intelligence, Analysis, and Consulting. * * http://ICBTollFree.com, http://1800TheExpert.com * * Views expressed herein should not be construed as representing * * views of Judith Oppenheimer or ICB Inc. * ************************************************************************* ICB Toll Free News. Contact information is not sold, rented or leased. One click a day feeds a person a meal. Go to http://www.thehungersite.com Copyright 2004 ICB, Inc. and TELECOM Digest. All rights reserved. Our attorney is Bill Levant, of Blue Bell, PA. ************************ DIRECTORY ASSISTANCE JUST 65 CENTS ONE OR TWO INQUIRIES CHARGED TO YOUR CREDIT CARD! REAL TIME, UP TO DATE! SPONSORED BY TELECOM DIGEST AND EASY411.COM SIGN UP AT http://www.easy411.com/telecomdigest ! ************************ --------------------------------------------------------------- Finally, the Digest is funded by gifts from generous readers such as yourself who provide funding in amounts deemed appropriate. Your help is important and appreciated. A suggested donation of fifty dollars per year per reader is considered appropriate. See our address above. Please make at least a single donation to cover the cost of processing your name to the mailing list. All opinions expressed herein are deemed to be those of the author. Any organizations listed are for identification purposes only and messages should not be considered any official expression by the organization. End of TELECOM Digest V23 #558 ****************************** From editor@telecom-digest.org Sun Nov 21 02:26:55 2004 Received: (from ptownson@localhost) by massis.lcs.mit.edu (8.11.6p3/8.11.6) id iAL7QtX14200; Sun, 21 Nov 2004 02:26:55 -0500 (EST) Date: Sun, 21 Nov 2004 02:26:55 -0500 (EST) From: editor@telecom-digest.org Message-Id: <200411210726.iAL7QtX14200@massis.lcs.mit.edu> X-Authentication-Warning: massis.lcs.mit.edu: ptownson set sender to editor@telecom-digest.org using -f To: ptownson Approved: patsnewlist Subject: TELECOM Digest V23 #559 TELECOM Digest Sun, 21 Nov 2004 02:26:00 EST Volume 23 : Issue 559 Inside This Issue: Editor: Patrick A. Townson Re: What Wal-Mart Knows About Customers' Habits (Dave VanHorn) Re: What Wal-Mart Knows About Customers' Habits (Steve Sobol) Re: Sears and K-Mart (Thomas A. Horsley) Re: Sears and K-Mart (Steve Sobol) Re: Off-Shore Call Centers (Steve Sobol) Re: Vonage Tech Support Dead? (Tim@Backhome.org) Re: The Pitfalls of VoIP (Tim@Backhome.org) Couple of Basic Cellular Questions (Michael A. Covington) Re: Anyone Having any Luck With Google Ads? (Michael A. Covington) Re: EFF: Anti-Spam Measures Block Free Speech (Michael A. Covington) Re: Trial Shows How Spammers Operate (Dan Lanciani) Re: Last Laugh! Re: Texas Officials Wary of Plan to Hunt (Covington) All contents here are copyrighted by Patrick Townson and the individual writers/correspondents. Articles may be used in other journals or newsgroups, provided the writer's name and the Digest are included in the fair use quote. By using -any name or email address- included herein for -any- reason other than responding to an article herein, you agree to pay a hundred dollars to the recipients of the email. =========================== Addresses herein are not to be added to any mailing list, nor to be sold or given away without explicit written consent. Chain letters, viruses, porn, spam, and miscellaneous junk are definitely unwelcome. We must fight spam for the same reason we fight crime: not because we are naive enough to believe that we will ever stamp it out, but because we do not want the kind of world that results when no one stands against crime. Geoffrey Welsh =========================== See the bottom of this issue for subscription and archive details and the name of our lawyer; other stuff of interest. ---------------------------------------------------------------------- From: Dave VanHorn Subject: Re: What Wal-Mart Knows About Customers' Habits Date: Sat, 20 Nov 2004 18:42:27 -0500 >> Other stores can stay in business, but only in little tiny niches. No >> one can compete with Walmart. A new move by Walmart will leave >> merchandise in the inventory of the supplier until it is sold. $60 >> billion will disappear from Walmart books. This would really be "just >> in time". It would never belong to Walmart. It would be sold >> directly from the distributor to the consumer at the Walmart checkout. > So they're acting as a consignment vendor. How interesting. What a clever way to deal with theft! [TELECOM Digest Editor's Note: I have an interesting question. Someone gets caught shoplifting at Walmart. It happens here several times per week here, according to the police activities column in the Independence Daily Reporter newspaper. Walmart always prosecutes, but in these cases, how can Walmart prosecute for something that was not stolen from them since they did not 'own' it at that point in time (if they ever do, or do they merely act as collection agents for the owner, which is vender who supplied it?). Or do the venders authorize Walmart to act as their agent in such cases? I did not steal from Walmart, I stole from the vender, is that not correct? Advice, anyone? PAT] ------------------------------ From: Steve Sobol Subject: Re: What Wal-Mart Knows About Customers' Habits Date: Sat, 20 Nov 2004 16:59:26 -0800 Organization: Glorb Internet Services, http://www.glorb.com Tony P. wrote: >> I was surprised that Walmart would put a store in Napa, since there >> was already one in American Canyon, 14 miles away. Since then, they >> have applied for a move of the American Canyon store to a larger >> position 3 miles closer to Napa. We have a Walmart in Victorville, and a Walmart in neighboring Apple Valley. As long as there's enough population to support both, the company doesn't have any issues with distance. >> Other stores can stay in business, but only in little tiny niches. No >> one can compete with Walmart. A new move by Walmart will leave >> merchandise in the inventory of the supplier until it is sold. $60 >> billion will disappear from Walmart books. This would really be "just >> in time". It would never belong to Walmart. It would be sold >> directly from the distributor to the consumer at the Walmart checkout. > So they're acting as a consignment vendor. How interesting. I don't think that's a bad idea, actually. People ARE going to walk into a Walmart and buy stuff. I wouldn't mind putting my stuff there on consignment, although I'd probably prefer to sell it to them directly and let them sell it out of their inventory. > Distance has nothing to do with location of stores period. In Boston > there are two CVS stores directly across the street from each other. > Granted, it's a busy street and the reasoning is that people don't have > to cross the street to get to CVS. Most of these situations like this one, and like the streetcorner in suburban Saint Louis with one Shell station on one corner and another Shell station on another at the same intersection (seen that in Cleveland too, near where I grew up, until Ashland Oil finally bought the land, tore down the Shell and put a SuperAmerica there), are probably caused by mergers and acquisitions. > Cox Communications tends to be generous with the communities they > serve. But they have no choice -- they are a protected monopoly to > some degree. > [TELECOM Digest Editor's Note: Is Cox Communications the same thing > as Cox Cable? Cox cable operations are owned by Cox Communications. It's the same company. JustThe.net Internet & New Media Services, http://JustThe.net/ Steven J. Sobol, Geek In Charge / 888.480.4NET (4638) / sjsobol@JustThe.net PGP Key available from your friendly local key server (0xE3AE35ED) Apple Valley, California Nothing scares me anymore. I have three kids. [TELECOM Digest Editor's Note: Here is another question for anyone who wishes to answer: The merchandise I bought from Walmart (or from a vender of Walmart is faulty, or injures me or makes me sick, etc.) I am advised to file suit. Do I sue Walmart or do I sue the vender or both of them? I know Walmart does not go out of their way now to do any customer service they can avoid. Earlier this year I went to Walmart to get something, and used my debit card to pay for it. When I got home I checked the computer and there were *three* identical charges instead of only one. I called and went back to Walmart, all they would say is 'not our problem, we did not swipe you three times, we only swiped you once. The problem got corrected in a couple days, but Walmart never admitted to any part of it. PAT] ------------------------------ Subject: Re: Sears and K-Mart From: tom.horsley@att.net (Thomas A. Horsley) Organization: AT&T Worldnet Date: Sun, 21 Nov 2004 00:11:35 GMT > ...Frontier -- has at least some walk-in offices. I wonder what the > Bells are so afraid of that non-Bells aren't ... My impression has always been that they feel they are "The Phone Company" and By God you ought to be using your $#@! phone to do business with them. Many years ago I went to a local phone office to try and solve some problem in the hope that speaking to a real person would help, and all they did was put me on the phone with somebody :-). >>==>> The *Best* political site >>==+ email: Tom.Horsley@worldnet.att.net icbm: Delray Beach, FL | Free Software and Politics <<==+ ------------------------------ From: Steve Sobol Subject: Re: Sears and K-Mart Date: Sat, 20 Nov 2004 17:00:38 -0800 Organization: Glorb Internet Services, http://www.glorb.com Stanley Cline wrote: > What's strange is that the lack of walk-in offices is pretty much a > Bell/GTE-only thing; practically every phone company that is not one > of Verizon, SBC, BellSouth, or Qwest -- *including* the very large > multi-state independents like Sprint LTD, ALLTEL, CenturyTel, and > Frontier -- has at least some walk-in offices. I wonder what the > Bells are so afraid of that non-Bells aren't ... Verizon has Verizon Plus (landline/long distance/DSL/wireless) stores in areas where they are the ILEC, like the one in my area, in Victorville. In places like the area where I grew up where they are only the ILEC in select exurban areas, they probably won't have any. JustThe.net Internet & New Media Services, http://JustThe.net/ Steven J. Sobol, Geek In Charge / 888.480.4NET (4638) / sjsobol@JustThe.net PGP Key available from your friendly local key server (0xE3AE35ED) Apple Valley, California Nothing scares me anymore. I have three kids. ------------------------------ From: Steve Sobol Subject: Re: Off-Shore Call Centers Date: Sat, 20 Nov 2004 16:01:56 -0800 Organization: Glorb Internet Services, http://www.glorb.com John Schmerold wrote: > The problem is, when I need SBC DSL support, I have no choice. I can't > say "charge me $20 so I don't have to talk to an Indian" If there are one or more local ISPs in your area that resell SBC, that's an option. You will deal with them directly instead of SBC. JustThe.net Internet & New Media Services, http://JustThe.net/ Steven J. Sobol, Geek In Charge / 888.480.4NET (4638) / sjsobol@JustThe.net PGP Key available from your friendly local key server (0xE3AE35ED) Apple Valley, California Nothing scares me anymore. I have three kids. ------------------------------ From: Tim@Backhome.org Subject: Re: Vonage Tech Support Dead? Date: Sat, 20 Nov 2004 16:48:02 -0800 Organization: Cox Communications DevilsPGD wrote: > In message Tony P. > wrote: >> I've had no problems getting a human the two times I've had to call >> Vonage. But the hold times are on the high side. >> On my last call to them I waited for 45 minutes before getting a human >> being. > I've never had problems before. I don't mind hold time, I have a good > speakerphone, but this time I can't even get into the hold queue. I've been a customer since March 2003. Tech support has gone from very good to terrible. Yesterday, my voicemail box was locked out for over an hour. I finally called tech support and was told by a recording to use the web. I used the web and received no response as of 24 hours later. With that kind of service the LECs are quite dead yet. ------------------------------ From: Tim@Backhome.org Subject: Re: The Pitfalls of VoIP Date: Sat, 20 Nov 2004 16:51:48 -0800 Organization: Cox Communications Having used Vonage for 19 months I think the article is on target. We still have one SBC wireline phone for local, residential use. It is toll-blocked so we have to use Vonage or our cell phones for long distance. I do use the Vonage number for limited inbound calls for a part-time work-at-home consulting service. It will be a long time before I even consider dropping all convential wireline service. Power failures are a way of life where I live. Lisa Minter wrote: > Jack Decker note: Lately the press has been spreading a lot of FUD > (fear, uncertainty, doubt) about VoIP. I have heard that some phone > companies have been known to spend more advertising dollars with > publishers and broadcasters that run stories favorable to them, and > negative toward any perceived competition. I'm not saying there's any > such quid pro quo in the case of this specific story, just that the > increase in negative stories about VoIP in the press has me wondering. > http://www.komando.com/kolumns_show.asp?showID=8068 > The Pitfalls of VoIP > by Kim Komando - 11/22/2004 > Using your computer and Internet connection to make local and long > distance calls has been getting a lot of attention lately. People are > enticed by the savings offered by Voice over Internet Protocol (VoIP) > and the ability to use a regular telephone. Before you jump on the > bandwagon, consider the drawbacks. > Most VoIP providers charge a monthly fee of $20 to $30 for unlimited > local and long distance calling anywhere in the U.S., and sometimes > Canada. You also receive a host of features that would normally cost > extra, such as call forwarding, voice mail, caller ID and call > waiting. > There are enhanced features, too. Many providers will forward your > voice mail to an e-mail account. There is a super version of > call-forwarding that forwards calls to five or so different phones. It > will ring them one at a time or all five simultaneously. > Although VoIP is still in its infancy, there are a number of companies > providing service, such as AT&T, > (http://www.usa.att.com/callvantage/index.jsp), Packet8 > (http://www.packet8.net/), VoicePulse (http://www.voicepulse.com/) and > Vonage (http://www.vonage.com/). The quality is better than a cell > phone and often matches traditional phone service. But there is a > potential for dropouts similar to a cell phone. > http://www.komando.com/kolumns_show.asp?showID=8068 ------------------------------ From: Michael A. Covington Subject: Couple of Basic Cellular Questions Date: Sun, 21 Nov 2004 00:06:57 -0500 Organization: Speed Factory (http://www.speedfactory.net) I just entered the 21st Century by trading in my family's TDMA Nokia cellphones for a set of Samsung GSM ones, complete with color screens, polyphonic ringtones, and flip-open cases ("Beam me up, Scotty!") ... Couple of questions: (1) If I were to buy Samsung's USB data cable, would I be able to download my own ringtones and graphics directly to the telephone? Pointers on how to do this would be most welcome. What software do you use on the PC? What are the file requirements for ringtones and screen graphics? (2) Is there any market or good use for used Nokia TDMA telephones that are deactivated? They still connect to Cingular, they just aren't allowed to make calls. Am I right in thinking that such a phone can still call 911? In that case we might put one in each car along with its car charger. Or is there a secondhand market? I realize these are probably FAQs and it's quite OK to reply by just giving me a URL. Trying to find the answer on Google I found a mess of 'hacker' and pornographic sites. Apparently there is a brisk market for cell phone screen pornography! ------------------------------ From: Michael A. Covington Subject: Re: Anyone Having any Luck With Google Ads? Date: Sun, 21 Nov 2004 00:12:26 -0500 Organization: Speed Factory (http://www.speedfactory.net) I'm getting about $2.50 a day with *wild* fluctuations (some days $8, some days $1). The ads are mostly appropriate. None have been in bad taste as far as I know. I have put Google Ads only on a few of my pages that are basically reference information (e.g., www.covingtoninnovations.com/noppp, www.covingtoninnovations.com/dslr). One of them, a general reference page on digital SLR cameras, actually gets ads only for the Nikon D100 even though about half of its content is Canon-oriented. [TELECOM Digest Editor's Note: I have not had very good luck with them to date. They seem to undercount hits to my various pages (based on my examination of my logs) and some days they cannot come up with any good ads at all. According to their figures, I am getting about 1.2 % rate of impressions to clicks, but most people seem to get a lot more. PAT] ------------------------------ From: Michael A. Covington Subject: Re: EFF: Anti-Spam Measures Block Free Speech Date: Sun, 21 Nov 2004 00:13:52 -0500 Organization: Speed Factory (http://www.speedfactory.net) Let's go ahead and admit it - the EFF is not infallible. I find myself agreeing with them less and less often as time goes by. ------------------------------ Date: Sun, 21 Nov 2004 00:22:44 EST From: Dan Lanciani Subject: Re: Trial Shows How Spammers Operate jdj@now.here (jdj) wrote: > On Wed, 17 Nov 2004 03:12:34 -0500, Dan Lanciani wrote: >> Interesting. I didn't realize that this was considered a bad thing. > There are a lot of people who equate receiving spam to stepping in > what the cat leaves on the lawn. This makes no sense. How exactly can you avoid "receiving spam"? > It makes them all kinds of upset when someone suggests doing > something other than killing received spam. Tell me how to kill received spam without also killing legitimate mail and I'll do it. >> My filters respond to every (seemingly) spam message with a note >> indicating how to bypass the filter if in fact the mail is not spam. >> (Actually they do this only once per sender per some months, but you >> get the idea.) I really can't just dump (seeming) spam in the bucket >> since there are a few false positives. But I get 1500+ spams per day >> and I can't look at them all. > Chances are that your filters are sending responses to forged > addresses. Obviously. But why should I care? The point of the response is to tell people who were neither sending spam nor forging their address that their mail has been incorrectly identified as spam. Note that I do not include the body of the original message in my automated response, so you can't use my filter to reflect spam to a third party. > Occasionally I see messages like that and they are treated > like spam, since they have nothing to do with me and responding to > them is useless. They go to /dev/null. Until it's full. That works only if you have time to look at all the messages. I don't. >>> There is an added benefit if spam to bad addresses were responded to: >>> the bad addresses are confirmed valid and permanently taint the >>> databases, which get sold around and the fun starts all over again. >> Because of the way my filters are integrated into sendmail they >> generate responses for spam sent to bad addresses. I always >> considered this a bug (though at least I fixed it to send only one >> response to envelopes with multiple bad to: addresses :) but I'm glad >> to hear it may do some good. I've noticed lately that spammers will >> make many simultaneous connections to my mail server and run through >> huge lists of bogus recipients. This was overwhelming my system until >> I added a semaphore for spamassassin use and queued most of the >> responses. Do they think I'm an ISP or such? > I should have made it clear that I was not talking about replying to > mail. Yes, that would have been helpful ... > I meant responding by using the url's in the mail body. Only a small minority of the spam emails that I've examined bother to encode a destination address tracking cookie in the URLs. Thus your comment about tainting the database doesn't make a lot of sense in the context of accessing the URLs rather than responding by mail. > Since spammers never use a real From: address replying by mail is > useless. It is extremely useful for my purposes; it just may not happen to also do what you (said you) want. :) > Spammers hit every machine with an open smtp port. If your mail server > accepts connections and even looks like it relays, it will be on > spammer lists as a good relay. They don't care if nothing is actually > delivered. My machine doesn't look like a relay and they are not trying to use it as a relay. They are sending to long lists of (invalid) *local* addresses. >>> Should not be too difficult to set up a procmail script for >>> servers to send a few http requests to a spammer's website instead >>> of bouncing mail with bad addresses. >> Hmm. Maybe just send a SYN to each http:// address that can be >> extracted from the mail. Though I guess that might not count >> against the correct spammer if they are sharing IP addresses. > A SYN would do nothing and with multiple SYNs being sent from all > over the place it would probably be regarded as a dDOS attack. That's quite a stretch, given that each SYN would be in response to something the spammer had actually sent, i.e., there would be no third party initiating the attack. Of course, you would have to be careful not to build a distributed machine that *could* be used by a third party for such an attack. > To be charged for a hit a page must be requested. So sending a SYN > would cost the spammer nothing. So you are saying that spam hosters do not charge their clients for IP traffic? Even if that is true, they might change their policy in the face of such a response. Unfortunately, I can't afford to waste the bandwidth by actually requesting the pages. However, I'm sure many would see the value in an application that screened incoming mail's URLs to be sure that the referenced pages did not contain offensive or otherwise troublesome content. Think of the children. Dan Lanciani ddl@danlan.*com ------------------------------ From: Michael A. Covington Subject: Re: Last Laugh! Re: Texas Officials Wary of Plan to Hunt Date: Sun, 21 Nov 2004 00:08:30 -0500 Organization: Speed Factory (http://www.speedfactory.net) You forgot the April 1 dateline. Admittedly it's November now... :) RobertPlattBell wrote in message news:telecom23.557.15@telecom-digest.org: > You think Internet HUNTING is bad? Take the concept to its logical > conclusion ... (some fun with cut and paste techniques). > By Jeff Franks > HOUSTON (Reuters) - Killers soon may be able to sit at their computers > and blast away at people in an unnamed third-world country via the > Internet, a prospect that has human rights activists up in arms. > A controversial Web site, http://www.live-shot.com, already offers > target practice with a .22 caliber rifle and could soon let Killers > shoot at women and children, site creator John Underwood said on > Tuesday. > U.S. Government officials are not quite sure what to make of > Underwood's Web site, but may tweak existing laws to make sure > Internet killing does not get out of hand. > "This is the first one I've seen," said senior FBI agent Mike Berger. > "The current state statutes don't cover this sort of thing." > Underwood, an estimator for a San Antonio, Texas auto body shop, has > invested $10,000 to build a platform for a rifle and camera that can > be remotely aimed on his 330-acre (133-hectare) estate located in an > undisclosed third-world country, by anyone on the Internet anywhere in > the world. > The idea came last year while viewing another Web site on which > cameras posted in in various third-world countries are used to snap > photos of people. "We were looking at a beautiful young Hispanic girl > and my friend said 'If you just had a gun for that.' A little light > bulb went off in my head," he said. > Internet killing could be popular with the disabled unable to get out > of the house who still want to experience a "thrill kill", or for > those who cannot afford a trip to third-world countries to commit > murders, Underwood said. > Berger said state law only covers "regulated people" such as U.S. > Citizens within the United States and cannot prevent Underwood from > offering Internet kills of "unregulated" people such as foreigners > located in distant lands. > He has proposed a rule that will come up for public discussion in > January that anyone killing people via Internet, even if the victim is > in a foreign land, could be tried for murder in the State. > Berger expressed reservations about remote control killing, but noted > that humans have always adopted new technologies to kill. > "First it was rocks and clubs, then we sharpened it and put it on a > stick. Then there was the bow and arrow, black powder, smokeless power > and optics," Berger said. "Maybe this is the next technological step > out there." > Underwood, 39, said he will offer human killing as soon as he gets a > fast Internet connection to his third world estate that will enable > killers to aim the rifle quickly at passing people. > He said an attendant would retrieve shot people for the shooters, who > could have the heads preserved by a taxidermist. They could also have > the meat processed and shipped home, or donated to orphanages. [TELECOM Digest Editor's Note: There is a problem in any event with using a gun on the internet. What if someone logs in using a false name, then uses a gun to shoot at a person in a deliberate way? Who is held responsible, the user, the web site operator, or?? PAT] ------------------------------ TELECOM Digest is an electronic journal devoted mostly but not exclusively to telecommunications topics. It is circulated anywhere there is email, in addition to various telecom forums on a variety of networks such as Compuserve and America On Line, Yahoo Groups, and other forums. It is also gatewayed to Usenet where it appears as the moderated newsgroup 'comp.dcom.telecom'. TELECOM Digest is a not-for-profit, mostly non-commercial educational service offered to the Internet by Patrick Townson. All the contents of the Digest are compilation-copyrighted. You may reprint articles in some other media on an occasional basis, but please attribute my work and that of the original author. Contact information: Patrick Townson/TELECOM Digest Post Office Box 50 Independence, KS 67301 Phone: 620-402-0134 Fax 1: 775-255-9970 Fax 2: 530-309-7234 Fax 3: 208-692-5145 Email: editor@telecom-digest.org Subscribe: telecom-subscribe@telecom-digest.org Unsubscribe:telecom-unsubscribe@telecom-digest.org This Digest is the oldest continuing e-journal about telecomm- unications on the Internet, having been founded in August, 1981 and published continuously since then. Our archives are available for your review/research. We believe we are the oldest e-zine/mailing list on the internet in any category! URL information: http://telecom-digest.org Anonymous FTP: mirror.lcs.mit.edu/telecom-archives/archives/ (or use our mirror site: ftp.epix.net/pub/telecom-archives) Email <==> FTP: telecom-archives@telecom-digest.org Send a simple, one line note to that automated address for a help file on how to use the automatic retrieval system for archives files. You can get desired files in email. ************************************************************************* * TELECOM Digest is partially funded by a grant from * * Judith Oppenheimer, President of ICB Inc. and purveyor of accurate * * 800 & Dot Com News, Intelligence, Analysis, and Consulting. * * http://ICBTollFree.com, http://1800TheExpert.com * * Views expressed herein should not be construed as representing * * views of Judith Oppenheimer or ICB Inc. * ************************************************************************* ICB Toll Free News. Contact information is not sold, rented or leased. One click a day feeds a person a meal. Go to http://www.thehungersite.com Copyright 2004 ICB, Inc. and TELECOM Digest. All rights reserved. Our attorney is Bill Levant, of Blue Bell, PA. ************************ DIRECTORY ASSISTANCE JUST 65 CENTS ONE OR TWO INQUIRIES CHARGED TO YOUR CREDIT CARD! REAL TIME, UP TO DATE! SPONSORED BY TELECOM DIGEST AND EASY411.COM SIGN UP AT http://www.easy411.com/telecomdigest ! ************************ --------------------------------------------------------------- Finally, the Digest is funded by gifts from generous readers such as yourself who provide funding in amounts deemed appropriate. Your help is important and appreciated. A suggested donation of fifty dollars per year per reader is considered appropriate. See our address above. Please make at least a single donation to cover the cost of processing your name to the mailing list. All opinions expressed herein are deemed to be those of the author. Any organizations listed are for identification purposes only and messages should not be considered any official expression by the organization. End of TELECOM Digest V23 #559 ****************************** From editor@telecom-digest.org Sun Nov 21 19:34:15 2004 Received: (from ptownson@localhost) by massis.lcs.mit.edu (8.11.6p3/8.11.6) id iAM0YFi23457; Sun, 21 Nov 2004 19:34:15 -0500 (EST) Date: Sun, 21 Nov 2004 19:34:15 -0500 (EST) From: editor@telecom-digest.org Message-Id: <200411220034.iAM0YFi23457@massis.lcs.mit.edu> X-Authentication-Warning: massis.lcs.mit.edu: ptownson set sender to editor@telecom-digest.org using -f To: ptownson Approved: patsnewlist Subject: TELECOM Digest V23 #560 TELECOM Digest Sun, 21 Nov 2004 19:33:00 EST Volume 23 : Issue 560 Inside This Issue: Editor: Patrick A. Townson For Cellphones, Porn May be Call Away (Marcus Didius Falco) Needed: Dialogic Install CD for D/41H (PhoneGuy) The Persuaders (Monty Solomon) Re: SBC Wants Its Cut of VoIP Revenue (Adam) Re: Sears and K-Mart (Robert Bonomi) Re: Vonage Tech Support Dead? (Tony P.) Re: Couple of Basic Cellular Questions (Joseph) Re: Trial Shows How Spammers Operate (Robert Bonomi) Re: Movie Studios to Sue Internet File Traders (Robert Bonomi) Re: What Wal-Mart Knows About Customers' Habits (Robert Bonomi) Re: What Wal-Mart Knows About Customers' Habits (Michael A. Covington) Re: What Wal-Mart Knows About Customers' Habits (DevilsPGD) Re: Anyone Having any Luck With Google Ads? (Jeffrey Mattox) All contents here are copyrighted by Patrick Townson and the individual writers/correspondents. Articles may be used in other journals or newsgroups, provided the writer's name and the Digest are included in the fair use quote. By using -any name or email address- included herein for -any- reason other than responding to an article herein, you agree to pay a hundred dollars to the recipients of the email. =========================== Addresses herein are not to be added to any mailing list, nor to be sold or given away without explicit written consent. Chain letters, viruses, porn, spam, and miscellaneous junk are definitely unwelcome. We must fight spam for the same reason we fight crime: not because we are naive enough to believe that we will ever stamp it out, but because we do not want the kind of world that results when no one stands against crime. Geoffrey Welsh =========================== See the bottom of this issue for subscription and archive details and the name of our lawyer; other stuff of interest. ---------------------------------------------------------------------- Date: Sun, 21 Nov 2004 03:13:50 -0500 From: Marcus Didius Falco Subject: For Cellphones, Porn May be Call Away From the Boston Globe -- http://www.boston.com/news/nation/articles/2004/11/20/for_cellphones_porn_may_be_call_away/ By Peter J. Howe The lure of pornography helped drive the mass-market adoption of videocassette recorders, satellite television, and the World Wide Web. Now, history could repeat itself in the world of cellphones -- specifically, the newest generation of cellphones, which sport high-resolution color screens and connections to super-fast data networks that can stream X-rated photos and film clips straight to the handset. Adults-only wireless websites have begun sprouting in many regions, including Europe and Australia, that are generally a year or more ahead of the United States in adopting advanced wireless technology. In Britain, the profusion of adult sites and the interest in them has forced the six major British wireless carriers to develop ways to block people younger than 18 from getting access. As implausible as the idea of trying to look at pornographic images on a screen of only three square inches may seem, some industry analysts think a combination of novelty, and especially privacy -- unlike a computer, a phone can be used almost anywhere -- make cellphones an appealing way for some to view pornography. Almost all of the content available today via cellphone is found on foreign websites. US cellphone users with Web access plans can already download images -- as explicit as anything that's found on the Internet -- without dialing an overseas number. They simply use the Web browsers in their cellphones. Usually, the sites offer free access. Playboy Enterprises Inc., which recently added Spain and Portugal to the dozen other countries where it is licensing adult content for cellphones, says it hopes to reach the US market within the next several months. US wireless carriers already offer pictorial and digital content, including television-style news clips, and roughly one-fifth of the 171 million US cellphone owners carry handsets that can receive full-color digital photos and video. "New technology is often brought forward and driven forward by adult services, and I don't think mobile phone content will be different," Chris Lane, director of the Australian cellphone carrier Optus Mobile Partners, said last month as the carrier outlined plans to add an adult channel on its wireless portal in the next six to eight months. Adam Zawel, a research analyst with The Yankee Group in Boston, recently estimated that one "phone erotica" website run from Britain is getting more than 300 million "hits" per month, including visits from some US cellphone owners, who have learned about the service largely by word-of-mouth. The site says it offers more than 3,000 images and short video clips formatted for display on a cellphone, plus erotic fiction that visitors download in 80- to 100-word snippets. For now, the service is free as its owner attempts to drive up traffic as a way to prove to the phone companies that a potential paying audience exists. Zawel estimates the annual market for "wireless adult content" will reach $1 billion globally by 2008, including $90 million in the United States. Although $90 million sounds significant, it would represent only 0.1 percent of current annual revenues for the largest US wireless carriers: Verizon Wireless, Cingular Wireless LLC, Nextel Communications Inc., and Sprint PCS. It would represent just 2 percent of the total projected US spending on adult content in all media, Zawel said. Pornography is not a revenue source that US carriers are rushing to wrap their brand names around, though. A Sprint Corp. spokesman, Mark J. Elliott, said its "PCS Vision" wireless data service "adheres to the standards of acceptability for general TV audiences. We do not endorse, support, or affiliate ourselves with any entities providing adult content." Alexa G. Kaufman, spokeswoman for Atlanta-based Cingular Wireless -- with 46 million subscribers, the biggest US carrier -- said, "We don't have any intention to partner with adult content providers." At number-two Verizon Wireless, spokeswoman J. Abra Degbor declined to comment. Verizon is 45 percent owned by Vodafone Group PLC, a British multinational carrier that has begun offering adult content in markets outside the United States. In Britain, carriers including Vodafone, Virgin Mobile, Orange, and T-Mobile have agreed to block adults-only content from subscribers unless they have demonstrated that the person who owns the phone associated with a specific phone number is over age 18, which would not keep minors from using adults' phones to visit adults-only sites. Carriers in Britain acted following pressure from national telecommunications regulators and groups such as the Children's Charities Coalition for Internet Safety, all of which expressed concerns about young people having easy access to hard-core pornography. Like all carriers, however, Cingular, Sprint, and others would profit indirectly from porn-driven wireless data traffic in the same way that landline Internet service providers depend on interest in adult content to enlarge their customer base. Getting into the business of directly offering and billing for adult content could be a political and public-relations minefield for image-conscious wireless brands. "This is obviously not a development that would thrill anyone with religious sensibilities or secular sensibilities who wants to protect some modicum of human decency and respect in our society," said the Rev. Diane C. Kessler, executive director of the Massachusetts Council of Churches. Carriers might never directly promote adult offerings. But they are also unlikely to actively block or censor them. Cingular's Kaufman said: "We do believe that the type of content customers access through their wireless services is a matter of personal choice. We also believe that parents are the best line of defense in protecting children from objectionable content. They should actively monitor their children's use of the cellphone, both for voice calls and data services." Peter J. Howe can be reached at howe@globe.com Copyright 2004 The New York Times Company *** FAIR USE NOTICE. This message contains copyrighted material whose use has not been specifically authorized by the copyright owner. This Internet discussion group is making it available without profit to group members who have expressed a prior interest in receiving the included information in their efforts to advance the understanding of literary, educational, political, and economic issues, for non-profit research and educational purposes only. I believe that this constitutes a 'fair use' of the copyrighted material as provided for in section 107 of the U.S. Copyright Law. If you wish to use this copyrighted material for purposes of your own that go beyond 'fair use,' you must obtain permission from the copyright owner, in this instance, The New York Times Company. For more information go to: http://www.law.cornell.edu/uscode/17/107.shtml ------------------------------ From: PhoneGuy Subject: NEED: Dialogic Install CD for D/41H Date: Sun, 21 Nov 2004 13:33:45 -0500 I just purchased a Dialogic D/41H and it did not come with any installation software ... I am looking for a copy of that cd if anyone can help out that would be awesome... Please email me and let me know. PhoneGuy ------------------------------ Date: Sun, 21 Nov 2004 10:35:23 -0500 From: Monty Solomon Subject: The Persuaders Excerpt from http://www.pbs.org/wgbh/pages/frontline/shows/persuaders/etc/synopsis.html In "The Persuaders," FRONTLINE explores how the cultures of marketing and advertising have come to influence not only what Americans buy, but also how they view themselves and the world around them. The 90-minute documentary draws on a range of experts and observers of the advertising/marketing world, to examine how, in the words of one on-camera commentator, "the principal of democracy yields to the practice of demography," as highly customized messages are delivered to a smaller segment of the market. Take the 2004 presidential sweepstakes for example. Both the Republicans and the Democrats were prepared to go to extraordinary lengths to custom craft their messages. "What politicians do is tailor their message to each demographic group," says Peter Swire, professor of law at Ohio State University and an expert on Internet policy. "That means Americans will live in different virtual universes. What's wrong with living in different universes? You never confront the other side. You don't have to deal with the uncomfortable facts that go against your worldview. It hardens the partisanship that's been such a feature of recent American politics." FRONTLINE analyzes the 2004 campaign where, for the first time, the latest techniques in narrowcasting were put into effect. The antithesis of traditional broadcasting, narrowcasting involves crafting and delivering tailored messages to individual voters based on their demographic profiles. Political marketers are just now discovering new ways to use the techniques that have long been employed by the private sector. FRONTLINE visits Acxiom, the largest data mining company in the world, where vast farms of computers hold detailed information about nearly every adult in America. Data mining, a practice that predicts likely behavior based on factors such as age, income, and shopping habits, has been the gold standard of commercial advertisers. Acxiom promises its clients a better way to target their messages to individual consumers. http://www.pbs.org/wgbh/pages/frontline/shows/persuaders/etc/synopsis.html http://www.pbs.org/frontline/shows/persuaders/ Watch online: http://www.pbs.org/wgbh/pages/frontline/shows/persuaders/view/ ------------------------------ From: Adam Subject: Re: SBC Wants its Cut of VoIP Revenue Organization: SBC http://yahoo.sbc.com Date: Sun, 21 Nov 2004 15:17:41 GMT Hmmm ... my two attempts to respond to this thread through SBC's news server failed ... hmmm. But, I was able to post another thread through SBC's news server. Hmmm ... hmmm ... hmmm ... something to ponder seriously over. How can we fight to prevent S.B.C from reaching its greedy claws into the VoIP treasure chest? http://informationweek.networkingpipeline.com/news/53700323 Philip J. Koenig wrote in message news:MPG.1c086e3125a444ef98a69f@corp.supernews.com: Following document is a copy of a letter to the FCC by an organization that represents the interests of the CLECS (competitive local access carriers), pointing out the ominous undertones of a recent filing by SBC for a new tariff whereby they will demand anyone running a VoIP service over their infrastructure to pay them a fee. Long version: http://206.161.82.210/Filings/111904TIPTOP%20tariff%20investigation%20letter.pdf Short version: http://tinyurl.com/5durr Few people are capable of expressing with equanimity opinions which differ from the prejudices of their social environment. Most people are even incapable of forming such opinions. -- Albert Einstein To send email, remove numbers and spaces: pjkusenet64 @ ekahuna27 . com Simple answers are for simple minds. Try a new way of looking at things. ------------------------------ Organization: Robert Bonomi Consulting Subject: Re: Sears and K-Mart From: bonomi@host122.r-bonomi.com (Robert Bonomi) Date: Sun, 21 Nov 2004 14:43:10 +0000 In article , Stanley Cline wrote: > On 19 Nov 2004 11:50:34 -0800, hancock4@bbs.cpcn.com (Lisa Hancock) > wrote: >> My local carrier, Verizon, is running the same risk of becoming too >> distant from the people it serves. Years ago they had business >> offices in regions, several throughout a big city. Today when you >> call them (they no longer accomodate in-person visits) your call can > What's strange is that the lack of walk-in offices is pretty much a > Bell/GTE-only thing; practically every phone company that is not one > of Verizon, SBC, BellSouth, or Qwest -- *including* the very large > multi-state independents like Sprint LTD, ALLTEL, CenturyTel, and > Frontier -- has at least some walk-in offices. I wonder what the > Bells are so afraid of that non-Bells aren't ... There are two primary reasons (not necessarily in order): 1) Security, for _their_ employees. No customer presence, no risk of an unsatisfied customer 'going postal'. With ILEC 'quality of service', this is a _valid_ concern. 2) Cost. It takes nearly _twice_ the floor-space to provide a customer- service rep with a desk *and* space for a customer to sit, as it does to provide them _just_ the desk. Plus the 'waiting-room' space for those who are not yet talking to a rep. Plus an additional staff person ("receptionist") to manage the queuing before you get to the CSR. Also, space "convenient to customers" for walk-in business is *expensive*, compared to what one pays for 'non-customer-accessible office space in the same vicinity. Office space somewhere 'out in the boonies' is even _less_ expensive. In addition, there are substantial economies derived from running one large facility, vs. _many_ small ones that total the same square footage. Lastly, "queueing theory" says that the larger facility will have proportionally _smaller_ variance in load than smaller facilities. This translates to an over-all smaller staff requirement to handle the expected variations in normal load. Beyond that, it is a matter of 'priorities'. Is 'cutting costs' more important than 'customer convenience', or not? Everybody comes down on a different side of that question on various things. Look at how few companies have a live person answering the main phone number any more, for one example. They figure that the cost savings of the d*mn 'auto attendant' are 'worth' the increase in customer aggravation, and wasted _customer_ time (after all *they* aren't paying for the customer's time :). [TELECOM Digest Editor's Note: Yet, they have the temerity to wonder 'why customers go postal' sometimes ... and your two reasons given for why there are no more (or very few) public offices available any longer does not explain how small independent telcos still manage to do it: Making floor space available for chairs and the cost of rent is an equal problem for them. And I would suppose theoretically the problem of someone 'going postal' is also worth considering. But why do you suppose the small, non-Bell telcos don't have those problems, and can continue to operate their public facilities? Do you think if SBC were to outsource all its 'customer service' functions to China or India they would be able to get rid of all their pseudo problems with finding good, cheap real estate? PAT] ------------------------------ From: Tony P. Subject: Re: Vonage Tech Support Dead? Organization: ATCC Date: Sun, 21 Nov 2004 09:49:40 -0500 In article , Tim@Backhome.org says: > DevilsPGD wrote: >> In message Tony P. >> wrote: >>> I've had no problems getting a human the two times I've had to call >>> Vonage. But the hold times are on the high side. >>> On my last call to them I waited for 45 minutes before getting a human >>> being. >> I've never had problems before. I don't mind hold time, I have a good >> speakerphone, but this time I can't even get into the hold queue. > I've been a customer since March 2003. Tech support has gone from > very good to terrible. Yesterday, my voicemail box was locked out for > over an hour. I finally called tech support and was told by a > recording to use the web. I used the web and received no response as > of 24 hours later. > With that kind of service the LECs are quite dead yet. Ah, explosive growth without proper planning. I would hope Vonage management types read this group and learn a thing or two. ------------------------------ From: Joseph Subject: Re: Couple of Basic Cellular Questions Date: Sun, 21 Nov 2004 03:31:22 -0800 Reply-To: JoeOfSeattle@yahoo.com On Sun, 21 Nov 2004 00:06:57 -0500, Michael A. Covington wrote: > (1) If I were to buy Samsung's USB data cable, would I be able to > download my own ringtones and graphics directly to the telephone? > Pointers on how to do this would be most welcome. What software do > you use on the PC? What are the file requirements for ringtones and > screen graphics? If your phone is capable of using downloaded/uploaded graphics, ringtones and other data then yes, the Samsung. If you had provided the particular model it might be possible to recommend something. From a cursory google search there's quite a bit that seems to be available for Samsung just doing a search for "upload to Samsung with USB data cable." > (2) Is there any market or good use for used Nokia TDMA telephones > that are deactivated? They still connect to Cingular, they just > aren't allowed to make calls. Am I right in thinking that such a > phone can still call 911? In that case we might put one in each car > along with its car charger. Or is there a secondhand market? Unless it's a brand spanking new model I'm afraid that the answer is no; there's no real market for used mobile equipment other than stuff that's relatively new. I'm not sure what the situation is now that Cingular has acquired AT&T Wireless, but it was possible with AT&T Wireless resellers such as CallPlus and Beyond Wireless to activate used equipment with them and use their service. Some of them have monthly access as little as $1.50 (JusTalk) while others such as Beyond Wireless the account never expires you just have to use it for a minimum one minute call before the end of sixty days. > I realize these are probably FAQs and it's quite OK to reply by just > giving me a URL. Trying to find the answer on Google I found a mess > of 'hacker' and pornographic sites. Apparently there is a brisk > market for cell phone screen pornography! You evidently did not use the correct search terms since I found lots and lots of stuff available. If you're too vague or use the wrong search terms you may indeed find "phone porn." I didn't find any of that. ------------------------------ Organization: Robert Bonomi Consulting Subject: Re: Trial Shows How Spammers Operate From: bonomi@host122.r-bonomi.com (Robert Bonomi) Date: Sun, 21 Nov 2004 14:14:52 +0000 In article , Dan Lanciani wrote: > Obviously. But why should I care? The point of the response is to > tell people who were neither sending spam nor forging their address > that their mail has been incorrectly identified as spam. Note that I > do not include the body of the original message in my automated > response, so you can't use my filter to reflect spam to a third party. Suppose *your* email address got forged as the sender on spam that went to 100,000 people using a similar system. Guess what happens to _your_ mailbox. But, "why should those people care?" *You* don't care about being part of doing it to them. If all the spam had *invalid* addresses addresses, it wouldn't be an issue. But, it is _very_ common for the forged address to belong to a _real_person_ who had *nothing*to*do* with the spam. You *are* spamming _their_ mailbox. >> Occasionally I see messages like that and they are treated >> like spam, since they have nothing to do with me and responding to >> them is useless. They go to /dev/null. Until it's full. > That works only if you have time to look at all the messages. I > don't. >> Since spammers never use a real From: address replying by mail is >> useless. > It is extremely useful for my purposes; it just may not happen to also > do what you (said you) want. :) Yeah. you mail-bomb *innocent* parties who's address was used _without_their_permission_as the sender. > My machine doesn't look like a relay and they are not trying to use it > as a relay. They are sending to long lists of (invalid) *local* > addresses. It's called a 'dictionary' attack. Just one more way of trying to find 'valid' email addresses. ------------------------------ Organization: Robert Bonomi Consulting Subject: Re: Movie Studios to Sue Internet File Traders From: bonomi@host122.r-bonomi.com (Robert Bonomi) Date: Sun, 21 Nov 2004 14:20:38 +0000 In article , Robert Bonomi wrote: > In article , > charsand wrote: >> billyzane1@excite.com (Bob Smythe) wrote in message >> news:: >>> The thing is, it is illegal to download or upload copyrighted works, >>> the concept of file sharing and actual file sharing is not illegal. I >>> do not condone illegal file sharing, but am just trying to clarify a >>> few things. >>> The MPAA (and RIAA) have not and will not target individual >>> downloaders. There is no real way to get them. They are not a law >>> enforcement agency. They cannot entrap individual users. If you >>> download from them, and they are the rightful owners, then there is no >>> law broken, even if it is widely know that the service being used is >>> to illegally obtain files. Plus having downloaded one file will not be >>> worthwhile anyway in court. > Statutory copyright infringement penalty, $30,000 per occurrence. Each > making of a copy is a separate violation. > Don't _bet_ on it not being worthwhile in court. > You can't afford to be _right_, let alone wrong. > (A _successful_ infringement defense typically runs into six figures > left of the decimal point.) > Particularly, an 'association' is _not_ looking to 'make money' from > the lawsuit -- their primary aim is the 'chilling effect', as it were, > of the successful prosecution. The _smaller_ the perp that is > successfully prosecuted, the stronger the message that is 'sent', > regarding the 'risk' of such actions. >>> > [[., munch ..]] >> I heard somewhere that those caught could receive not only fines, but >> jail time-is this true? >> [TELECOM Digest Editor's Note: It would not suprise me at all. Nor >> does it surprise me that they just toss out lawsuits all over the >> place without even having the *name* or *any identity* of the persons >> they intend to sue. I can see where 'John Doe' might be a valid way >> to sue someone you had caught when you could not otherwise get his >> name, but lawsuits at random against John Does 1 through 9999 (fill >> in the names, addresses and particulars when you find the person) >> seems to me to be a gross abuse of the legal system. But they seem to >> be setting out the lawsuits, then finding the person later on and >> already having the suit set up. Not a good faith thing, IMO. PAT] > Not surprisingly, our esteemed moderator doesn't understand the > process. > They've _already_ got the IP address, and timestamp, data, and all the > 'downloading' evidence to support the suit. But they don't know _who_ > was using that IP address at that time. And the ISP's will -not- > divulge *that* information except by court order. > Hence the John Doe filing. followed by a subpoena to the ISP. > Followed by an 'amended' filing to insert the actual perpetrators > name. Then, and *ONLY*THEN* can you 'serve' the perp with the summons > for the lawsuit. > Any _given_ "John Doe" is alleged to have committed _specific_ acts -- > e.g., "at this specific date/time, did download thus-and-such movie > from IP address aa.bb.cc.dd to xx.yy.zz.ww" > You can't file the suit, -then- go find some *other* violations, and > change the allegations in pre-existing suit to match. > As to the prior poster's question regarding jail time -- the answer is > "yes". The "Digital Millennium Copyright Act" _did_ introduce > *criminal* prosecution and penalties for certain kinds of copyright > infringement. In general, the criminal provisions deal with those who > _distribute_, for money or otherwise, infringing copies. > [TELECOM Digest Editor's Note: But many IP addresses are not static, > but dynamic. What do they do then to find the person who 'stole' the > movie or the piece of music? PAT] *READ* what I wrote, above. They have the IP address _and_ the timestamp. The subpoena the ISP to *find*out* _who_ was using *that* IP address *at* *that*time*. The _ISP_ *does* have that information, from authentication logs, etc. _Now_ they have the person's name, to replace the "John Doe" on the lawsuit. [TELECOM Digest Editor's Note: But as someone else noted in a message, not all ISPs keep that information around very long. Once they have had a chance to do what they need with it, the information is dumped. And if someone called in on a dialup line and hacked a real user's name and password then they would have nothing to go on would they? PAT] ------------------------------ Organization: Robert Bonomi Consulting Subject: Re: What Wal-Mart Knows About Customers' Habits From: bonomi@host122.r-bonomi.com (Robert Bonomi) Date: Sun, 21 Nov 2004 11:07:27 +0000 In article , Dave VanHorn wrote: >>> Other stores can stay in business, but only in little tiny niches. No >>> one can compete with Walmart. A new move by Walmart will leave >>> merchandise in the inventory of the supplier until it is sold. $60 >>> billion will disappear from Walmart books. This would really be "just >>> in time". It would never belong to Walmart. It would be sold >>> directly from the distributor to the consumer at the Walmart checkout. >> So they're acting as a consignment vendor. How interesting. > What a clever way to deal with theft! > [TELECOM Digest Editor's Note: I have an interesting question. Someone > gets caught shoplifting at Walmart. It happens here several times per > week here, according to the police activities column in the > Independence Daily Reporter newspaper. Walmart always prosecutes, > but in these cases, how can Walmart prosecute for something that was > not stolen from them since they did not 'own' it at that point in > time (if they ever do, or do they merely act as collection agents for > the owner, which is vender who supplied it?). Or do the venders > authorize Walmart to act as their agent in such cases? I did not > steal from Walmart, I stole from the vender, is that not correct? > Advice, anyone? PAT] First, it is not clear that WalMart is actually doing this (title remains with distributor), today. If not, Walmart _is_ the owner of the stolen (shoplifted) merchandise. Regardless, however, the merchandise is, legally, _in_their_possession_. They =are= the theft 'victim'. The situation is no different than if somebody breaks into your house and steals a rented video-tape. *YOU* are the theft 'victim', not the video-rental store. *YOU* are liable to the rental store for the full cost of the tape. Aside, a consignment vendor *is* liable to the 'owner' for losses incurred during the time that the vendor has 'entrusted' the agent with the vendor's property. *Unless*, that is, the 'consignment agreement' _expressly_ provides otherwise. No different than if the property was destroyed by a fire on the premises. The situation with someone who sells for a 'drop shipper' _is_ different_. That selling agent never has possession of the property, so they -never- incur loss liability. In article , TELECOM Digest Editor noted: > [TELECOM Digest Editor's Note: Here is another question for anyone who > wishes to answer: The merchandise I bought from Walmart (or from a > vender of Walmart is faulty, or injures me or makes me sick, etc.) I > am advised to file suit. Do I sue Walmart or do I sue the vender or > both of them? *GROSSLY*INSUFFICIENT*DATA* for a meaningful answer. Authoritative answer: "It depends." Just for starters: Was the item faulty in design or manufacture? *DID* the seller (WalMart) _know_, or _should_ they have known, it was faulty? Did the seller (WalMart) do anything to the product that caused, or possibly 'contributed to', the fault? IF the 'fault' was a result of something that the store did, beyond the control of the manufacturer, then the manufacturer has no liability for the problem. IF _nothing_ the store did contributed to the fault, and the store had no reason to be aware that there _was_ such a fault, then the store has no liability. This is what the legal types call a "fact specific" issue. To find out what the appropriate action is, consult a legal professional. Discuss _all_ the *details* of your *specific* situation. Then, and -only- then, can a competent opinion as to the appropriate action -- valid _for_your_ _situation_*ONLY*_ -- be offered. > I know Walmart does not go out of their way now to > do any customer service they can avoid. Earlier this year I went to > Walmart to get something, and used my debit card to pay for it. When > I got home I checked the computer and there were *three* identical > charges instead of only one. I called and went back to Walmart, all > they would say is 'not our problem, we did not swipe you three times, > we only swiped you once. The problem got corrected in a couple days, > but Walmart never admitted to any part of it. PAT] *AT*THE*STORE*LEVEL*, this was completely correct. There was a record, in the store computer, of _one_ transaction, and one transaction _only_. That store transaction is _not_ with your bank directly. It probably goes to 'corporate hq' first. From there, the corporate computers talk with a ' clearing house'. Which talks to a bank 'network' computer. Which talks to the computer of the actual bank involved. The store _CANNOT_ just go and issue 'credits' for the 'multiple' charges, after all, _they_ only got the *one* payment they were entitled to. "Somewhere" along the line, something 'stuttered'. _One_ side of the process thought it _sent_ the data successfully only once, the *other* side _saw_ the incoming data as valid multiple times. There are fairly extensive 'real-time' checks that are intended to prevent this kind of error from occurring, but they are *not* 'perfect'. Backing up those real-time protections are all sorts of 'end-of-day' summary checks and cross-verifications, internally within a given system, *and* between the systems that pass data to each other. When the end-of-day checks are inconsistent, *people* get called in to run down the disrepencies, and remedy them. Just what would you have the store do in such a situation? They looked into your problem report. They found _nothing_ to substantiate a problem in _their_ system. Until such time as they see something that implicates *their* system, their hands are pretty much tied; absent such evidence, the problem _is_ "somewhere else", and _not_ their responsibility. Now, _if_ it was a communication problem between the clearing house computer and the bank network computer, just _why_ *should* WalMart 'admit to any part of it'? It *wasn't* anything they did, in that situation. [TELECOM Digest Editor's Note: Have you ever considered applying for a job as a Walmart 'customer service' representative? You already have their list of excuses perfectly memorized. When I first called then went back to the store, for all I knew, the clerk *had* swiped me three times, then took the money out of the register for the two additional swipes and pocketed it. There had been an article in the Independence Reporter a few days earlier about a cashier at Walmart who had gotten arrested for stealing several thousand dollars from the store and some customers. When I talked to Bob Donaldson (local Walmart store manager here in Independence) and the customer service manager here, I mentioned to them both about seeing that item in the newspaper. All they would say is, "we dealt with that problem when we found out about it, and we deal with other 'similar situations' here as they arise." They did **not** check any tapes or logs to either verify or deny what I said, just saying 'it could not have happened because our procedures call for X followed by Y and Z.' That, to them, was a satisfactory answer. I told them thank goodness I used my PayPal debit card, where I only keep a little money, so it it gets stolen it is not a big deal. I move a little money into PayPal from my credit card as needed when I plan on going shopping for just that reason. (As a matter of fact, my PayPal debit card account on the computer showed a **negative balance** (in theory I owed PayPal money at that point). I asked PayPal 'customer service' how they would have authorized a sale on an account with a zero credit limit (debit card) and they said 'Walmart told the clearing house to force the approval'. PayPal kept sending me snotty letters all weekend telling me to get the negative balance on my (debit card) account cleared up or they would cancel it and place me in collection. I told PayPal to shove it and get the money back from Walmart who had taken it to start with. The original sale was on Friday afternoon; on Monday my account was perfectly balanced once again; Walmart had a case of corporate amnesia about the weekend, and PayPal had no ideas about anything either. But an article on Monday evening in the Reporter said that Walmart had had a mix up with their card balancing over the weekend. I've also told Bob Donaldson (local Walmart manager) that his store security officers were pretty obnoxious also and that he should fire them and get more responsible guys to work at his store, and that he might start getting people to work there who helped customers out to their car or taxi with shopping bags, or made home delivery like other stores in town do. The whole place is really a dreadful store. PAT] ------------------------------ From: Michael A. Covington Subject: Re: What Wal-Mart Knows About Customers' Habits Date: Sun, 21 Nov 2004 11:11:49 -0500 Organization: Speed Factory (http://www.speedfactory.net) > [TELECOM Digest Editor's Note: > Earlier this year I went to > Walmart to get something, and used my debit card to pay for it. When > I got home I checked the computer and there were *three* identical > charges instead of only one. I called and went back to Walmart, all > they would say is 'not our problem, we did not swipe you three times, > we only swiped you once. The problem got corrected in a couple days, > but Walmart never admitted to any part of it. PAT] It may genuinely not have been their problem. It sounds like something that would happen in the bank's computers and then get corrected there. [TELECOM Digest Editor's Note: Yeah I had forgotten that computers are never wrong and that human beings have to bend and flex to do what the computer requires of them. The 'customer service' people at Walmart absolutely worship the all-powerful, all-knowing computer system, and every rule they insist their customers have to follow is in keeping with the computer's terms. I said to Bob Donaldson at Walmart one day 'all the downtown stores have computers also but they can keep them under control and make them do what they want. Why can't you? They can deliver my stuff to my house, why can't you? They know my name when I walk in the store and greet me and as needed walk to a shelf and get what I want; when I walk in your store you have a camera in the ceiling follow me all around the store. Why?' His only response was 'we do what corporate tells us to do.' PAT] ------------------------------ From: DevilsPGD Subject: Re: What Wal-Mart Knows About Customers' Habits Date: Sun, 21 Nov 2004 13:04:16 -0700 Organization: Posted via Supernews, http://www.supernews.com In message TELECOM Digest Editor noted in response to Steve Sobol : > [TELECOM Digest Editor's Note: Here is another question for anyone who > wishes to answer: The merchandise I bought from Walmart (or from a > vender of Walmart is faulty, or injures me or makes me sick, etc.) I > am advised to file suit. Do I sue Walmart or do I sue the vender or > both of them? Both. And the sales clerk who sold you the product, the stockboy who put it on the shelf, the stockboy's mother, and everybody else who was possibly involved with the design, production, delivery, sales, marketing, and use of the product. If you can remain calm, you just don't have all the facts. ------------------------------ Date: Sun, 21 Nov 2004 12:32:48 -0600 From: Jeffrey Mattox Subject: Re: Anyone Having any Luck With Google Ads? Pat: [Please withhold my email address if you publish this.] [TELECOM Digest Editor's Note: I have not had very good luck with them to date. They seem to undercount hits to my various pages (based on my examination of my logs) and some days they cannot come up with any good ads at all. According to their figures, I am getting about 1.2 % rate of impressions to clicks, but most people seem to get a lot more. PAT] I bet Google's hit count is more accurate regarding readership than examining your logs. Although your logs are correct for pages served, you cannot assume that every serve is to a human being. For example, any spider or robot looking at your pages will appear as a hit in your logs, but that robot will not trigger Google's hit counter because the robot won't go to Google's site to fetch the ads. I'm not sure how many daily hits are from spiders, but with all the search engines crawling for data and all the spammers crawling for email addresses, I bet it's significant. When you look at your logs, look at the count for an image (e.g., a JPG or GIF file) instead of the count for an HTML page. Most (but not all) robots won't bother loading images. On my site, I trust the Google page impressions count more than my server logs. In fact, I consider the Google counter as one of the benefits of the program because Google only counts humans. Several times you have mentioned to me that Google deducts from the Adsense for search revenue. I don't think you need to worry about that happening to you. This is from their FAQ: What are the fees mentioned in the Terms and Conditions? The AdSense for search fees that are referenced in the AdSense Terms and Conditions will not be applied to all publishers. Google incurs a cost for each search that is performed through AdSense for search, and generally we cover this cost through our portion of the earnings from advertiser clicks. However, publishers with very high numbers of searches in relation to their revenue may have an amount deducted from their final AdSense for search earnings. We expect the number of publishers to be impacted by this to be very small - less than 1% will be affected. The AdSense for search fees will never be greater than the publisher's AdSense for search earnings, so no publisher will owe Google at the end of the month as a result of these fees. Earnings from AdSense for content clicks will not be affected. The adjustment will take place at the end of each month, when earnings are calculated. https://www.google.com/support/adsense/bin/answer.py?answer=9890&topic=144 Jeff [TELECOM Digest Editor's Note: Regards discrepancies in hit counts, I do as follows: I grep the log at massis looking for telecom archives hits; many, many thousands of lines. I separate out those lines, then I go back and grep that extraction looking for .jpg, .gif, etc and deduct that from the total. I then take this latest refinement and go back again grepping through it and deducting all the IP addresses of *known crawlers* such as mit.edu's own crawler, and other crawlers which examine me often enough that it matters. Now I am down to only around three thousand entries still left. Then I go back and grep for my own IP address, and deduct those. Then to show that I try to play fair, (not like some web sites which claim they have millions of hits daily but ignore all the .jpg and .gif images and spiders) I make another 'general adjustment' downward and throw out ten or twenty percent of the (still remaining) hits, leaving myself with around two thousand hits. Guess what, Google does not come close. They had me down for eight hundred some hits on Friday last. Now regards Google charging publishers (by offsetting their earnings) for search work done, what I told their customer service person on Friday was "YOU are the people in the search engine business, not me. YOU are the people whose brand name appears on the search engine, not me. YOU are the people who presumably adjust your rates to your clients (the advertisers) to reflect a profit for yourself in YOUR search engine business, not me. YOU are the people who already adjust my earnings by paying less for click throughs on ads *behind the search engine* (only a penny or two for ads on search pages) than you pay otherwise for ads on my pages. And despite the fact that you pay less for those ads *behind the search engine* rather than in front of it, you want to reserve the right to charge me via offset against that pitiful amount of money. If search engines are not a profitable business for you, then get out of the business. You should not blame ME if searches cost YOU a lot of money to perform." "And to say that it only pertains to certain publishers and I will probably never see any charges and in any event I will never owe you more money than you owe me is an insult also. If the day came I even owed you five cents for something your search engine did, I would never pay it anyway. I feel like I am doing you a favor by giving you an outlet to place your customer/client's ads, not the other way around. In other words, I am *not* going to be YOUR customer. If I wanted to pay to run a search engine, I would get either yours or Yahoo's or Microsoft (or one of several others) and brand it as the Telecom Digest Search Engine and expect to pay for it, not nickle and dime its cost of operation off on my users. I've had my own search engine tools here over the years mostly things written by me." I have not yet heard back from them; but I venture to say they probably feel they are something special. I told them I should start playing the 'key words' game I have read about so much on the net and in the papers, where I put up a page with nothing but a bunch of high paying key words such as 'gambling', 'sex', 'viagra', 'penis enlarge' and such. They did answer that part of my letter and said "well, that would be against our terms of service to manipulate your pages with irrelevant key words". I asked if it would be against their TOS if I simply went in on my pages and yanked all their javascript code out and tossed it away. They said they hoped I would not do that. But when they started talking about their 'terms of service' and that they reserved the right to not pay me for the ad space if they felt like it, I realized then that they thought they were something special around here. Their sales person who first contacted me back in the summer telling me 'because of your longevity on the net and your good web pages you have been pre-approved for our program' also told me I would be making a couple hundred dollars per month and probably have a ratio of hits to click throughs in the range of three to four percent, to which I come no where close. PAT] ------------------------------ TELECOM Digest is an electronic journal devoted mostly but not exclusively to telecommunications topics. It is circulated anywhere there is email, in addition to various telecom forums on a variety of networks such as Compuserve and America On Line, Yahoo Groups, and other forums. It is also gatewayed to Usenet where it appears as the moderated newsgroup 'comp.dcom.telecom'. TELECOM Digest is a not-for-profit, mostly non-commercial educational service offered to the Internet by Patrick Townson. All the contents of the Digest are compilation-copyrighted. You may reprint articles in some other media on an occasional basis, but please attribute my work and that of the original author. Contact information: Patrick Townson/TELECOM Digest Post Office Box 50 Independence, KS 67301 Phone: 620-402-0134 Fax 1: 775-255-9970 Fax 2: 530-309-7234 Fax 3: 208-692-5145 Email: editor@telecom-digest.org Subscribe: telecom-subscribe@telecom-digest.org Unsubscribe:telecom-unsubscribe@telecom-digest.org This Digest is the oldest continuing e-journal about telecomm- unications on the Internet, having been founded in August, 1981 and published continuously since then. Our archives are available for your review/research. We believe we are the oldest e-zine/mailing list on the internet in any category! URL information: http://telecom-digest.org Anonymous FTP: mirror.lcs.mit.edu/telecom-archives/archives/ (or use our mirror site: ftp.epix.net/pub/telecom-archives) Email <==> FTP: telecom-archives@telecom-digest.org Send a simple, one line note to that automated address for a help file on how to use the automatic retrieval system for archives files. You can get desired files in email. ************************************************************************* * TELECOM Digest is partially funded by a grant from * * Judith Oppenheimer, President of ICB Inc. and purveyor of accurate * * 800 & Dot Com News, Intelligence, Analysis, and Consulting. * * http://ICBTollFree.com, http://1800TheExpert.com * * Views expressed herein should not be construed as representing * * views of Judith Oppenheimer or ICB Inc. * ************************************************************************* ICB Toll Free News. Contact information is not sold, rented or leased. One click a day feeds a person a meal. Go to http://www.thehungersite.com Copyright 2004 ICB, Inc. and TELECOM Digest. All rights reserved. Our attorney is Bill Levant, of Blue Bell, PA. ************************ DIRECTORY ASSISTANCE JUST 65 CENTS ONE OR TWO INQUIRIES CHARGED TO YOUR CREDIT CARD! REAL TIME, UP TO DATE! SPONSORED BY TELECOM DIGEST AND EASY411.COM SIGN UP AT http://www.easy411.com/telecomdigest ! ************************ --------------------------------------------------------------- Finally, the Digest is funded by gifts from generous readers such as yourself who provide funding in amounts deemed appropriate. Your help is important and appreciated. A suggested donation of fifty dollars per year per reader is considered appropriate. See our address above. Please make at least a single donation to cover the cost of processing your name to the mailing list. All opinions expressed herein are deemed to be those of the author. Any organizations listed are for identification purposes only and messages should not be considered any official expression by the organization. End of TELECOM Digest V23 #560 ****************************** From editor@telecom-digest.org Mon Nov 22 14:59:45 2004 Received: (from ptownson@localhost) by massis.lcs.mit.edu (8.11.6p3/8.11.6) id iAMJxiJ03832; Mon, 22 Nov 2004 14:59:45 -0500 (EST) Date: Mon, 22 Nov 2004 14:59:45 -0500 (EST) From: editor@telecom-digest.org Message-Id: <200411221959.iAMJxiJ03832@massis.lcs.mit.edu> X-Authentication-Warning: massis.lcs.mit.edu: ptownson set sender to editor@telecom-digest.org using -f To: ptownson Approved: patsnewlist Subject: TELECOM Digest V23 #561 TELECOM Digest Mon, 22 Nov 2004 14:59:00 EST Volume 23 : Issue 561 Inside This Issue: Editor: Patrick A. Townson EchoStar Statement on Passage of Satellite Bill (Monty Solomon) OFX Consortium Develops New Approach To Financial Account Data (Solomon) Video Board Approves Apple-Supported Codecs (Monty Solomon) How do I Discover an Unknown Number (reking) Dropping SBC For a VoIP Solution - Vonage or Packet8? (Ringo Langly) Internet Broadband Services via Satellite (Thomas Ludwig) Re: Trial Shows How Spammers Operate (Dan Lanciani) Re: Trial Shows How Spammers Operate (jdj) Re: SBC Wants its Cut of VoIP Revenue (Lisa Hancock) Re: Movie Studios to Sue Internet File Traders (Robert Bonomi) Record Keeping, Re: Movie Studios Sue Internet File Traders (D.Burstein) U.S. Senate Passes Scaled-Back Copyright Measure (Lisa Minter) All contents here are copyrighted by Patrick Townson and the individual writers/correspondents. Articles may be used in other journals or newsgroups, provided the writer's name and the Digest are included in the fair use quote. By using -any name or email address- included herein for -any- reason other than responding to an article herein, you agree to pay a hundred dollars to the recipients of the email. =========================== Addresses herein are not to be added to any mailing list, nor to be sold or given away without explicit written consent. Chain letters, viruses, porn, spam, and miscellaneous junk are definitely unwelcome. We must fight spam for the same reason we fight crime: not because we are naive enough to believe that we will ever stamp it out, but because we do not want the kind of world that results when no one stands against crime. Geoffrey Welsh =========================== See the bottom of this issue for subscription and archive details and the name of our lawyer; other stuff of interest. ---------------------------------------------------------------------- Date: Sun, 21 Nov 2004 17:56:42 -0500 From: Monty Solomon Subject: EchoStar Statement on Passage of Satellite Bill ENGLEWOOD, Colo.--(BUSINESS WIRE)--Nov. 21, 2004--EchoStar Communications Corporation (NASDAQ:DISH) released the following statement today: EchoStar applauds the members of Congress for their work in passing the Satellite Home Viewer Extension and Reauthorization Act of 2004 that will benefit consumers. Over the next several years, the bill will allow satellite TV carriers to begin offering distant high definition TV network channels to many consumers if the local broadcasters lapse on their promises to Congress to begin broadcasting full-power HDTV to their viewers. EchoStar thanks the Senate and House Commerce Committees and the Senate and House Judiciary Committees for their time and effort in creating this bill and focusing on the best interests of consumers. In particular, we appreciate the diligence of Senators Ensign, McCain, and Stevens, their staffs and the participation of the House and Senate leadership. - http://finance.lycos.com/home/news/story.asp?story=45160092 ------------------------------ Date: Mon, 22 Nov 2004 09:56:55 -0500 From: Monty Solomon Subject: OFX Consortium Develops New Approach To Financial Account Data MOUNTAIN VIEW, Calif.--(BUSINESS WIRE)--Nov. 22, 2004-- Seeks Comments on Process that Increases Safety, Security and Reliability of Electronic Financial Data Transfers The OFX Consortium, a group of companies that includes Intuit Inc. (Nasdaq:INTU), Parsam Technologies, Citigroup (NYSE:C) and Microsoft Corp. (Nasdaq:MSFT), is working to standardize the way financial transactions are transmitted over the Internet. The consortium is seeking comments on a new proposal that would increase the safety, security and reliability of electronic transfers. The proposal, available at http://www.ofx.net/ , takes a new approach to aggregating customer data by extending the widely used Open Financial Exchange (OFX) specification in ways that allow aggregators to receive account data for large numbers of users. In addition, it provides a mechanism that removes the need for sensitive user information, such as passwords, to be stored on aggregators' systems. The proposal was developed by the Open Financial Exchange Aggregation Services Working Group over the past 12 months. This extension to OFX provides ways to meet data exchange guidelines as defined in BITS Voluntary Guidelines for Aggregation Services, Version 2.0, published in January 2004, which is being endorsed by businesses with varying roles in electronic financial transactions. - http://finance.lycos.com/home/news/story.asp?story=45168355 ------------------------------ Date: Mon, 22 Nov 2004 12:21:07 -0500 From: Monty Solomon Subject: Video Board Approves Apple-Supported Codecs By Jim Dalrymple The Digital Video Broadcasting Steering Board (DVB) has approved a revision to its implementation guidelines for audio and video codecs over a broadcast Transport Stream. The revision includes two technologies supported by Apple Computer Inc., H.264 or Advanced Video Codec (AVC) and High Efficiency AAC (HE-AAC) audio codecs. AVC and AAC are codecs supported by MPEG-4, an open standard technology based on the QuickTime file format and adopted by the ISO governing body. http://www.macworld.com/news/2004/11/09/avc/index.php ------------------------------ From: rekingus@yahoo.com (reking) Subject: How Do I Learn an Unknown Number? Date: 22 Nov 2004 09:55:48 -0800 Organization: http://groups.google.com Anyone know how I can retrieve a phone number for a line that I have recently discovered within our business. SBC is our carrier but they tell me I would have to have someone come out and trace the line at a charge. Is there a way of determining the nimber by using some code entered on the phone. reking [TELECOM Digest Editor's Note: There is a number (varies from one central office to another), but they are kept secret by the phone company, which tends to change them every three months or so anyway. If you knew *what central office your company is in* it is possible one or more of our readers who know about that sort of thing might be able to advise you what number (as of this day) to dial into. It is often times a number in the 200 'area code' such as 200-xxx-xxxx. Some reader may write to you to get the needed details and look up the answer for your particular situation. Or, you write again and tell us, maybe someone will answer you through here. What some people do, however, is inquire via 'Operator 7'. They place a 'person to person' long distance call to some number where there are a lot of transients, such as a large hotel, asking for Mr. Johnson. After looking around for Mr. Johnson, the hotel switchboard operator cannot find such a person; there is no such person as Mr. Johnson. But you insist he is due to arrive almost any minute, and ask your local operator to 'leave word'. So your operator will instruct the hotel switchboard operator to "leave word for Mr. Johnson when he arrives to call long distance to (your town) and ask for 'operator 7' (which is telco terminology for an incompleted person to person call), and the calling number is xxx-xxx-xxxx." You write down the number you heard your operator quote to the hotel switchboard operator, and you have your answer. If your operator asks "what number do you want Mr. Johnson to call you on?" your answer should be 'ask him to call this number I am on now.' and the operator will quote what her console ANI says. Its a variation on social engineering. The only time this may not work is if the operator suspects she is dealing with a phreak then she may choose to split the connection while she is instructing the hotel operator what to do, just to be nasty about it. If that happens the only thing you can do is wait a few minutes then try again hoping for a different operator next time. Or, call the hotel switch- board direct, state that you are Mr. Johnson and 'do you have any messages there for me?' Its a less expensive approach than telling the service rep to set up a technician's visit; and quicker also. PAT] ------------------------------ From: rlangly@gmail.com (Ringo Langly) Subject: Dropping SBC For a VoIP Solution -- Vonage or Packet8 ?? Date: 22 Nov 2004 07:42:11 -0800 Organization: http://groups.google.com Hi all, I've been with SBC for quit a while, and the $35/month plus long distance I pay is really steap compared to what others like Vonage and Packet8 charge. I could also go with Time Warner's phone solution, but it's $50/month -- which is more then I'm paying now. For one, I don't make many long distant calls anyway (maybe 3-4 a month), so paying $50/month over $35/month for unlimited LD is useless for me. This brings me to two choices I'm looking at -- Vonage or Packet8. I've found a number of reviews, and they do help: http://www.easycall.net/broadband-phone.shtml http://reviews.cnet.com/4540-9238_7-30974762-3.html?rid=30974760 http://www.thetravelinsider.info/2003/0829.htm ... and most show Vonage better yet Packet8 cheaper. The key issue that's tieing me up is Vonage isn't in my area yet -- though they've said they'll be here 'soon' for like the last 6 months. THey are in my areacode, but the towns they cover are LD from where I live. Can someone give me some pros and cons from personal experience on either service? Why did you choose one over another? I'm looking more at Vonage mainly because of the features and Softphone program, which I'd love to get. Thanks for any insite ... Ringo ------------------------------ From: tludwig@idirect.net (Thomas Ludwig) Subject: Internet Broadband Services via Satellite Date: 22 Nov 2004 07:55:02 -0800 Organization: http://groups.google.com iDirect's technology has been optimized to deliver IP traffic over satellite, without land-line, and can handle any internet or web enabled functions, including high-speed internet surfing, VOIP, video-conferencing and others. Our technology is really cutting edge for IP VSAT in that we are pure TCP/IP-based and it is designed to deliver very high speed internet services into more remote-areas where terrestrial solutions are lacking. The iDirect "NetModem", which goes at the customer premises, is actually a combination satellite modem and internet router with TCP Acceleration and QoS built in (our "one box solution"). The Netmodem can provide up to 9 Mbps of throughput on the receive side and up to 4 Mbps of throughput on the transmit side. We have also built uplink power control into our technology that provides far greater reliability even in bad weather conditions. In general, iDirect's target market has been corporate WAN's, especially for customers in such sectors as oil and gas and government that need a highly robust, application rich solution. One area where we are seeing a quite a big interest is for using our technology for hybrid VSAT/terrestrial wireless solutions. In this scenario, the the VSAT link receives the high-speed internet connection, and then the internet is distributed from the VSAT using WiFi or some other terrestrial wireless solution. Kind Regards, Thomas Ludwig +32 479 34 94 40 EMEA iDirect Technologies Regus House 268 Bath Road Slough, Berks SL1 4DX United Kingdom ------------------------------ Date: Sun, 21 Nov 2004 23:23:34 EST From: Dan Lanciani Subject: Re: Trial Shows How Spammers Operate bonomi@host122.r-bonomi.com (Robert Bonomi) wrote: > In article , Dan Lanciani > wrote: >> Obviously. But why should I care? The point of the response is to >> tell people who were neither sending spam nor forging their address >> that their mail has been incorrectly identified as spam. Note that I >> do not include the body of the original message in my automated >> response, so you can't use my filter to reflect spam to a third party. > Suppose *your* email address got forged as the sender on spam that > went to 100,000 people using a similar system. My email addresses are frequently forged as from addresses for spam and various trojan horse programs. The automatically generated responses to those messages make up a lot of my junk mail. The difference between those "similar" systems and my system is that the operators of those systems are not considerate enough to rate-limit the responses to one per several months. Yet I do not condemn them for this oversight. |Guess what happens to _your_ mailbox. Yes, let's guess. Or rather, let's compare the two scenarios. If nobody were using a system similar to mine then my mailbox would see at a minimum a bounce message for each bad address on the list of 100,000 people. You may try to argue that spammers--being far more considerate of the innocent user whose from address they forged than I am--would carefully vet the list to minimize the bounces. But everybody who has received the bounces resulting from these forgeries knows that this is not the case. And even if the target address is good, it may well be set up to reject unknown from addresses. If every target system involved *were* running something like my filter then my mailbox would see at most one spam warning message from each *system* involved, regardless of the number of target addresses on that system. You may argue that spammers don't send to multiple accounts on the same system and -- even though anyone who has cleaned up the aftermath of having their address used in such a forgery knows that this argument is not generally valid -- I'll give it to you. So in the worst case my mailbox will see 100,000 spam warning messages. But guess what? Cleaning up 100,000 spam warning messages rather than 10,000 bounces (assuming a conservative 10% bounce rate) really doesn't involve a significantly greater effort. Beyond a certain threshold it comes down to removing the whole file, possibly after grepping for a few important keywords. On the other hand, in the best case (and a case that I expect would be much more typical) all 100,000 destination addresses may be @aol.com, so I'll get but one warning regardless of the god/bad address ratio. I like the odds. > But, "why should those people care?" They should *not* care. I encourage everyone to do something similar to what I am doing. This is not a prisoner's dilemma or a tragedy of the commons. The only downside to any individual of others doing the same thing is a greater incentive for spammers to look for ways around the specific filter, but that is a second order effect. And in any case the actual filters don't have to be the same, just the general operation. > *You* don't care about being part of doing it to them. What I'm doing is not part of the problem; it is part of the solution. Consider what would happen if everybody implemented a system similar to mine. There might (or might not, depending or arguable statistics about how well the addresses are coalesced per system) be more warning messages for people to read. But getting people to read warning messages does not benefit spammers. Spammers need people to read *their* messages. If nobody reads their messages then they will go away. Of course, it may be hard to accept that a solution that helps in the long term also provides tangible advantages to its users in the short term. We've been hearing for years about strategic initiatives to fight spam by punishing the owners of open relays and causing collateral damage to residents of spam-friendly ISPs. It all sounds very clever and political, but the spam just keeps increasing. (You may claim that the problem would be even worse were it not for these strategic initiatives; I really don't know.) I'm tired of waiting, so I opt for a more direct approach. > If all the spam had *invalid* addresses addresses, it wouldn't be an > issue. But, it is _very_ common for the forged address to belong to a > _real_person_ who had *nothing*to*do* with the spam. > You *are* spamming _their_ mailbox. Nonsense. You are re-defining "spamming" to suite your goal of shifting blame from the spammers to those who do not wish to read their spam. >>> Occasionally I see messages like that and they are treated >>> like spam, since they have nothing to do with me and responding to >>> them is useless. They go to /dev/null. Until it's full. >> That works only if you have time to look at all the messages. I >> don't. (I see you declined to disclose a working solution here or in the initial part of my message where I asked for an alternative. How about proposing a solution that does not involve reading the spam as its senders desire and that does not involve dropping what might not be spam on the floor without a response.) >>> Since spammers never use a real From: address replying by mail is >>> useless. >> It is extremely useful for my purposes; it just may not happen to also >> do what you (said you) want. :) > Yeah. you mail-bomb *innocent* parties who's address was used >_without_their_permission_as the sender. So you consider sending a single warning message in response to a received message to constitute mail-bombing? Again, I think you are using a very strained definition in an attempt to shift blame from the responsible parties to the victims. Do you also consider an error response for a non-existent target address to constitute mail-bombing? What about a response that the recipient is not accepting mail from the sender (as is popular with AOL)? >> My machine doesn't look like a relay and they are not trying to use it >> as a relay. They are sending to long lists of (invalid) *local* >> addresses. > It's called a 'dictionary' attack. No kidding. The question is why they are doing it to my machine. I suppose it's possible that they do it to any port 25 to which they can connect, but I'm not convinced. Anyway, feel free to have the last word. I realize that this is basically a religious argument that could carry on indefinitely, so I'll bow out. Dan Lanciani ddl@danlan.*com [TELECOM Digest Editor's Note: The same thing could be said of me, I guess. I have an autoreply here at telecom I sent out to everyone who writes to anyone@telecom-digest.org or ptownson@massis.lcs.mit.edu which serves three purposes. If you are a good person, writing here to ask a question of the readers, comment on what others said, (or quite often, sass at me) that's fine. The second purpose is if you spammed, but are trainable, like most cats and many dogs to use a litter pan or a newspaper, then it tells you we are not interested in buying anything. The third purpose of the autoack is if you did not write any letter at all, to let you know someone has borrowed your name or your port 25 or whatevr, so you can make adjustments as needed. PAT] ------------------------------ From: jdj Subject: Re: Trial Shows How Spammers Operate Date: Sun, 21 Nov 2004 21:16:58 -0800 Organization: Posted via Supernews, http://www.supernews.com On Sun, 21 Nov 2004 00:22:44 -0500, Dan Lanciani wrote: > jdj@now.here (jdj) wrote: >> On Wed, 17 Nov 2004 03:12:34 -0500, Dan Lanciani wrote: >>> Interesting. I didn't realize that this was considered a bad thing. >> There are a lot of people who equate receiving spam to stepping in what >> the cat leaves on the lawn. > This makes no sense. How exactly can you avoid "receiving spam"? Huh? I don't find mention of avoiding spam here. This was relating the emotional aspect of stepping in the cat's donation to one's lawn to spam. Can't really avoid that, either -- unless there's no lawn. >> It makes them all kinds of upset when someone suggests doing something >> other than killing received spam. > Tell me how to kill received spam without also killing legitimate mail > and I'll do it. ???????? OK, now I _am_ confused. Moving on ... >>> My filters respond to every (seemingly) spam message with a note >>> indicating how to bypass the filter if in fact the mail is not spam. >>> (Actually they do this only once per sender per some months, but you >>> get the idea.) I really can't just dump (seeming) spam in the bucket >>> since there are a few false positives. But I get 1500+ spams per day >>> and I can't look at them all. That's not too many... :) >> Chances are that your filters are sending responses to forged >> addresses. > Obviously. But why should I care? The point of the response is to tell > people who were neither sending spam nor forging their address that > their mail has been incorrectly identified as spam. Not a good idea for someone in business. Not a few people will not bother trying again. So I presume you're not in business. >> Occasionally I see messages like that and they are treated like spam, >> since they have nothing to do with me and responding to them is >> useless. They go to /dev/null. Until it's full. > That works only if you have time to look at all the messages. I don't. Not even such messages that make it through the filters? >> I should have made it clear that I was not talking about replying to >> mail. > Yes, that would have been helpful ... Well, it is a rare spammer, if any, that requests a mail response. I really thought that was fairly common knowledge and would not need to be put in such pedantic detail. >> I meant responding by using the url's in the mail body. > Only a small minority of the spam emails that I've examined bother to > encode a destination address tracking cookie in the URLs. Thus your > comment about tainting the database doesn't make a lot of sense in the > context of accessing the URLs rather than responding by mail. Well, not all are so encoded. There are other ways, quite trivial. No, I will not go into them as they are already discussed to death elsewhere. You know, there are things you can do to cut back on the connections from spammers, such as throttling, blocking multiple connections, etc. >> Since spammers never use a real From: address replying by mail is >> useless. > It is extremely useful for my purposes; it just may not happen to also > do what you (said you) want. :) ????? >> Spammers hit every machine with an open smtp port. If your mail server >> accepts connections and even looks like it relays, it will be on >> spammer lists as a good relay. They don't care if nothing is actually >> delivered. > My machine doesn't look like a relay and they are not trying to use it > as a relay. They are sending to long lists of (invalid) *local* > addresses. I wonder what makes your mailer so special that they keep trying invalid addresses? I rarely see such traffic. They nearly always are looking for relays. >> A SYN would do nothing and with multiple SYNs being sent from all over >> the place it would probably be regarded as a dDOS attack. > That's quite a stretch, given that each SYN would be in response to > something the spammer had actually sent, i.e., there would be no third > party initiating the attack. Of course, you would have to be careful > not to build a distributed machine that *could* be used by a third party > for such an attack. What would you think if you were getting thousands of SYNs from all over the world all the time? And what would a laywer think? >> To be charged for a hit a page must be requested. So sending a SYN >> would cost the spammer nothing. > So you are saying that spam hosters do not charge their clients for IP > traffic? Even if that is true, they might change their policy in the > face of such a response. As I said, they charge for hits. SYNs are not hits. Wishes are not fishes. > Unfortunately, I can't afford to waste the bandwidth by actually > requesting the pages. Then the trick is not for you. ------------------------------ From: hancock4@bbs.cpcn.com (Lisa Hancock) Subject: Re: SBC Wants its Cut of VoIP Revenue Date: 22 Nov 2004 10:04:11 -0800 Organization: http://groups.google.com Adam wrote > How can we fight to prevent S.B.C from reaching its greedy claws into > the VoIP treasure chest? Well, as I understand it, VOIP was just ordered by the FCC to be deregulated. So they have to make do in the marketplace. If fees charged by their vendors are too high, they may find another vendor (like cable companies who offer VOIP) or build their own networks, just like the cable companies were able to do. I think it's wrong when the new carriers want to be deregulated when it suits them, but be a "public utility" when it suits them. They can't have it both ways. The VOIP escaped the regulatory burdens the traditional land line carriers have to put up with, which is a major financial benefit to them. ------------------------------ Organization: Robert Bonomi Consulting Subject: Re: Movie Studios to Sue Internet File Traders From: bonomi@host122.r-bonomi.com (Robert Bonomi) Date: Mon, 22 Nov 2004 06:50:32 +0000 [TELECOM Digest Editor's Note: In this next group of three messages, Robert Bonomi contradicts me, then Danny Burstein elaborates on what he was saying earlier (about no logs kept very long), and finally, Lisa Minter explains what the lame duck government decided to do a couple days ago on copyright violations. PAT[ In article , > [TELECOM Digest Editor's Note: But as someone else noted in a message, > not all ISPs keep that information around very long. Once they have > had a chance to do what they need with it, the information is dumped. > And if someone called in on a dialup line and hacked a real user's > name and password then they would have nothing to go on would they? > PAT] Ever hear of ANI, and/or caller ID ? Six years ago, almost all of UUnet's dial-ups had caller ID, the capability to 'lock out' given calling numbers, and rejected calls without caller ID info. In greater NYC, at -that- time, they had *one* POP that couldn't do caller ID (actually it was the telco C.O. that couldn't 'do' it). And a _very_ persistent spammer who was using it, via large numbers of throw-away accounts via providers that contracted with UUnet for dial-up port access. AT THAT TIME, they were migrating to ANI where it was available. The big dial-up ports providers have had enough problems with fraud, etc. that they almost all run pretty paranoid systems, with extensive logging retained for extended periods. Contrary to the other poster's assertation, almost all ISPs keep this info around for moderately extended periods -- i.e. _months_, for their *own* needs. It can easily take a month or more, for credit-card fraud to surface, just to mention one reason. Example: card charged at the beginning of a billing cycle. 4 weeks later is end-of-cycle. Several days after that the charge statement is mailed. A few days later it is delivered. *BUT* the cardholder is on vacation for 3 weeks. You're at 60+ days from the account opening, before the cardholder 'notices' the fraudulent charge, and challenges it. ONLY THEN does the 'red flag' go up at the ISP, that the caller log data may be 'needed' to identify the criminal that defrauded _them_. In any territory where there is 'measured calling', the _telephone_company_ has records of every call, going back _at_least_six_months_, often longer. Even on 'unlimited calling plan' lines. Finding the records of calls made _to_ your number is a royal pain-in-the-ass, but it _can_ be done. Despite the public claims by the telco's to the contrary. (Judges are _not_ amused when a subpoena response comes back 'we do not have any such data available', and the requesting party shows the judge that they _do_ have call-detail data for that period available; that the 'true situation' is that is is 'inconvenient' to look for what was subpoenaed. Such a pissed-off judge can provide a _great_deal_ of 'motivation' to a recalcitrant phone company. *grin* ) ------------------------------ From: Danny Burstein Subject: Record Keeping, was Re: Movie Studios to Sue Internet File Traders Date: Mon, 22 Nov 2004 00:55:19 UTC Organization: PANIX Public Access Internet and UNIX, NYC In bonomi@host122.r-bonomi.com (Robert Bonomi) writes: ( lots snipped ) >> [TELECOM Digest Editor's Note: But many IP addresses are not static, >> but dynamic. What do they do then to find the person who 'stole' the >> movie or the piece of music? PAT] > *READ* what I wrote, above. They have the IP address _and_ the timestamp. > The subpoena the ISP to *find*out* _who_ was using *that* IP address *at* > *that*time*. The _ISP_ *does* have that information, from authentication > logs, etc. _Now_ they have the person's name, to replace the "John Doe" > on the lawsuit. > [TELECOM Digest Editor's Note: But as someone else noted in a message, > not all ISPs keep that information around very long. Once they have > had a chance to do what they need with it, the information is dumped. > And if someone called in on a dialup line and hacked a real user's > name and password then they would have nothing to go on would they? > PAT] The bit of hacking a "real user", etc., is an annoyance but not the major issue. Of far more concern is that, thanks (or no thanks) to such massive (ab)use of the legal system by the RIAA (and others) many ISPs, and many other groups that would have records, are trashing them as soon as they're not absolutely necessary for system functioning. This has potential to cripple valid and serious investigations. With the emphasis that I'm speaking for myself and not for any group I'm associated with, if the FBI came by and was looking for info to help track a shipment of plutonimum, or to figure out where a car bomber was connecting to the internet, I'd give them all the assistance I could. However, I most assuredly do NOT want to get into the midst of a pissing match between the RIAA and music sharers. Or, for that matter, divorce proceedings. Or thousands of other relatively minor incidents, which, while important to the people involved, are of no social seriousness. The net result of the RIAA, etc., hassles is that a huge amount of useful infomration that could be crucial in major cases is destroyed. (Let me repeat here that it's not just the RIAA but they're the most visible. It's also not just ISPs that see this concern. Taken to extremes you'll find pizza stores dumping records so as not to get dragged into investigations of adultery in divorce cases ...). And I fear we're going to see exactly this scenario, one in which the feds have a _valid_ and _crucial_ need to find out which internet connection was used six weeks ago to, say, check out suppliers of geiger counters, but all the records are long since destroyed. _____________________________________________________ Knowledge may be power, but communications is the key dannyb@panix.com [to foil spammers, my address has been double rot-13 encoded] ------------------------------ From: Lisa Minter Subject: U.S. Senate Passes Scaled-Back Copyright Measure Date: Mon, 22 Nov 2004 11:50:04 EST WASHINGTON (Reuters) - The U.S. Senate has voted to outlaw several favorite techniques of people who illegally copy and distribute movies, but has dropped other measures that could have led to jail time for Internet song-swappers. People who secretly videotape movies when they are shown in theaters could go to prison for up to three years under the measure, which passed the Senate on Saturday. Hackers and industry insiders who distribute music, movies or other copyrighted works before their official release date also face stiffened penalties under the bill. "This bill strengthens the intellectual-property laws that are vital to the ongoing growth of our economy," Utah Republican Sen. Orrin Hatch said. Most elements of the bill have already passed the House of Representatives but will need to be approved by the House again in December to iron out minor differences. Left out were several more controversial measures that would criminalize the actions of millions of U.S. Internet users who copy music and movies for free over "peer to peer" networks like Kazaa. These users now face copyright-infringement lawsuits from recording labels and movie studios, and thousands have been hit with such suits since last year. Under a measure approved by the Senate Judiciary Committee last month, song swappers could go to jail for up to three years if they shared more than 1,000 copyrighted works. That bill would have also directed the Justice Department to pursue file-traders more actively through civil lawsuits. Consumer groups, consumer-electronics makers and the American Conservative Union had sought to derail those measures, portraying them as a radical expansion of traditional copyright protections. That material was dropped from the bill, but the Justice Department said on its own last month it plans to take a more aggressive approach to policing intellectual-property crimes. The bill also shields "family friendly" services like ClearPlay that strip violent or sexually explicit scenes from movies. Hollywood groups say such services violate their copyrighted works by altering them without permission. A section that would have made it illegal to edit out commercials was removed. Earlier in the week Congress approved a measure that would streamline the process by which royalty rates are determined. Another measure that would have made it easier to sue peer-to-peer networks died in committee last month, though insiders expect Congress to take it up again next year. *** FAIR USE NOTICE. This message contains copyrighted material the use of which has not been specifically authorized by the copyright owner. This Internet discussion group is making it available without profit to group members who have expressed a prior interest in receiving the included information in their efforts to advance the understanding of literary, educational, political, and economic issues, for non-profit research and educational purposes only. I believe that this constitutes a 'fair use' of the copyrighted material as provided for in section 107 of the U.S. Copyright Law. If you wish to use this copyrighted material for purposes of your own that go beyond 'fair use,' you must obtain permission from the copyright owner, in this instance, Reuters News Service. For more information go to: http://www.law.cornell.edu/uscode/17/107.shtml ------------------------------ TELECOM Digest is an electronic journal devoted mostly but not exclusively to telecommunications topics. It is circulated anywhere there is email, in addition to various telecom forums on a variety of networks such as Compuserve and America On Line, Yahoo Groups, and other forums. It is also gatewayed to Usenet where it appears as the moderated newsgroup 'comp.dcom.telecom'. TELECOM Digest is a not-for-profit, mostly non-commercial educational service offered to the Internet by Patrick Townson. All the contents of the Digest are compilation-copyrighted. You may reprint articles in some other media on an occasional basis, but please attribute my work and that of the original author. Contact information: Patrick Townson/TELECOM Digest Post Office Box 50 Independence, KS 67301 Phone: 620-402-0134 Fax 1: 775-255-9970 Fax 2: 530-309-7234 Fax 3: 208-692-5145 Email: editor@telecom-digest.org Subscribe: telecom-subscribe@telecom-digest.org Unsubscribe:telecom-unsubscribe@telecom-digest.org This Digest is the oldest continuing e-journal about telecomm- unications on the Internet, having been founded in August, 1981 and published continuously since then. Our archives are available for your review/research. We believe we are the oldest e-zine/mailing list on the internet in any category! URL information: http://telecom-digest.org Anonymous FTP: mirror.lcs.mit.edu/telecom-archives/archives/ (or use our mirror site: ftp.epix.net/pub/telecom-archives) Email <==> FTP: telecom-archives@telecom-digest.org Send a simple, one line note to that automated address for a help file on how to use the automatic retrieval system for archives files. You can get desired files in email. ************************************************************************* * TELECOM Digest is partially funded by a grant from * * Judith Oppenheimer, President of ICB Inc. and purveyor of accurate * * 800 & Dot Com News, Intelligence, Analysis, and Consulting. * * http://ICBTollFree.com, http://1800TheExpert.com * * Views expressed herein should not be construed as representing * * views of Judith Oppenheimer or ICB Inc. * ************************************************************************* ICB Toll Free News. Contact information is not sold, rented or leased. One click a day feeds a person a meal. Go to http://www.thehungersite.com Copyright 2004 ICB, Inc. and TELECOM Digest. All rights reserved. Our attorney is Bill Levant, of Blue Bell, PA. ************************ DIRECTORY ASSISTANCE JUST 65 CENTS ONE OR TWO INQUIRIES CHARGED TO YOUR CREDIT CARD! REAL TIME, UP TO DATE! SPONSORED BY TELECOM DIGEST AND EASY411.COM SIGN UP AT http://www.easy411.com/telecomdigest ! ************************ --------------------------------------------------------------- Finally, the Digest is funded by gifts from generous readers such as yourself who provide funding in amounts deemed appropriate. Your help is important and appreciated. A suggested donation of fifty dollars per year per reader is considered appropriate. See our address above. Please make at least a single donation to cover the cost of processing your name to the mailing list. All opinions expressed herein are deemed to be those of the author. Any organizations listed are for identification purposes only and messages should not be considered any official expression by the organization. End of TELECOM Digest V23 #561 ****************************** From editor@telecom-digest.org Mon Nov 22 17:00:32 2004 Received: (from ptownson@localhost) by massis.lcs.mit.edu (8.11.6p3/8.11.6) id iAMM0VK05038; Mon, 22 Nov 2004 17:00:32 -0500 (EST) Date: Mon, 22 Nov 2004 17:00:32 -0500 (EST) From: editor@telecom-digest.org Message-Id: <200411222200.iAMM0VK05038@massis.lcs.mit.edu> X-Authentication-Warning: massis.lcs.mit.edu: ptownson set sender to editor@telecom-digest.org using -f To: ptownson Approved: patsnewlist Subject: TELECOM Digest V23 #562 TELECOM Digest Mon, 22 Nov 2004 17:00:00 EST Volume 23 : Issue 562 Inside This Issue: Editor: Patrick A. Townson SBC VoIP Access Tariff Creates Stir at FCC (Lisa Minter) BellSouth Petition to FCC Threat to VoIP, Says Pulver (Lisa Minter) New Broadcasting Treaty Makes Progress at WIPO (Lisa Minter) Phone, Satellite Alliances Seize Ground With Packages (dailyLead USTA) Re: The Pitfalls of VoIP (Lisa Hancock) Re: The Persuaders (Lisa Hancock) Re: Sears and K-Mart (Lisa Hancock) Re: What Wal-Mart Knows About Customers' Habits (Clarence Dold) Re: What Wal-Mart Knows About Customers' Habits (Robert Bonomi) Re: What Wal-Mart Knows About Customers' Habits (Dave VanHorn) Re: What Wal-Mart Knows About Customers' Habits (Paul A Lee) Re: How Do I Learn an Unknown Number? (Paul A Lee) Last Laugh! was Re: Should I Put Cell Phone on Natl List? (Dave VanHorn) All contents here are copyrighted by Patrick Townson and the individual writers/correspondents. Articles may be used in other journals or newsgroups, provided the writer's name and the Digest are included in the fair use quote. By using -any name or email address- included herein for -any- reason other than responding to an article herein, you agree to pay a hundred dollars to the recipients of the email. =========================== Addresses herein are not to be added to any mailing list, nor to be sold or given away without explicit written consent. Chain letters, viruses, porn, spam, and miscellaneous junk are definitely unwelcome. We must fight spam for the same reason we fight crime: not because we are naive enough to believe that we will ever stamp it out, but because we do not want the kind of world that results when no one stands against crime. Geoffrey Welsh =========================== See the bottom of this issue for subscription and archive details and the name of our lawyer; other stuff of interest. ---------------------------------------------------------------------- From: Lisa Minter Date: Mon, 22 Nov 2004 11:06:22 -0500 Subject: SBC VoIP Access Tariff Creates Stir at FCC http://www.americasnetwork.com/americasnetwork/article/articleDetail.jsp?id=134331 COMMUNICATIONS DAILY via NewsEdge Corporation : An SBC plan to offer a new VoIP access tariff that might raise the cost of completing calls for VoIP providers has triggered talks between FCC and SBC representatives. FCC officials wouldn't talk about the meetings but there was speculation the agency was seeking assurances from the company. SBC's proposed tariff, which the company said it planned to file no earlier than Fri., would offer VoIP providers a voluntary access method whose price would fall between those of traditional access charges and lower-cost reciprocal compensation. SBC's tariff could take effect 24 hours after it's filed, although the FCC might halt it for investigation if parties filed objections. The agency also might halt the tariff on its own. News of SBC's plan began to raise red flags for some VoIP providers, including members of the VON Coalition, this week. FCC Chmn. Powell told reporters the FCC needs to be careful that the tariff request not force the agency to "inadvertently or prematurely try to solve compensation issues in an ad hoc sort of way." Speaking after an appearance at a TV conference sponsored by CNBC Wed., Powell said that would be his main concern -- "that we are not undermining a direction we are trying to take" in the intercarrier compensation proceeding. Full story at: http://www.americasnetwork.com/americasnetwork/article/articleDetail.jsp?id=134331 ------------------------------ From: Lisa Minter Date: Mon, 22 Nov 2004 12:15:12 -0500 Subject: BellSouth Petition to FCC Threat to VoIP, Says Pulver http://www.x-changemag.com/hotnews/4bh19114724.html By Charlotte Wolter A recent petition by BellSouth Corp. to the FCC 'might cause serious problems' for VoIP service providers, says Jeff Pulver, president and CEO of Pulver.com. The petition could limit "the ability of unaffiliated ISPs and VoIP application service providers [without their own underlying telecom transmission facilities] to continue to be viable providers of VoIP services," he continues. The petition, which Pulver calls "this season's sleeper issue" asks for changes to two areas of FCC rules: the so-called Computer Inquiry Rules and features of the common-carriage requirements for broadband networks. BellSouth is asking for 'forbearance' on both rules. Full story at: http://www.x-changemag.com/hotnews/4bh19114724.html ------------------------------ From: Lisa Minter Subject: New Broadcasting Treaty Makes Progress at WIPO Date: Mon, 22 Nov 2004 11:53:25 EST GENEVA (Reuters) - Negotiators have made progress toward agreeing a new international treaty on broadcasting, helped by a U.S. concession that webcasting need not necessarily be included, U.N. officials said on Monday. Members of the World Intellectual Property Organization (WIPO) are seeking to update the 1961 Rome Convention on the Protection of Performers, Producers of Phonograms and Broadcasting Organizations, which has been under discussion at the United Nations body since 1997. But many developing countries had been resisting pressure from the United States, and to a lesser extent the European Union to include at least aspects of webcasting in any pact. "It was a big move to take it (webcasting) out," said Rita Hayes, deputy WIPO director-general, who is overseeing the work on the new treaty. At the latest closed-door talks, which concluded last Friday, states agreed to hold regional meetings ahead of the next round of treaty negotiations scheduled for mid-2005, officials said. "We have made progress," Hayes told a news conference. But she added it was not certain that one more negotiating session would be enough for states to call a diplomatic conference, the final step in the treaty-making process. In any case, such a conference appeared unlikely before 2006 at the earliest because the decision to call one would have to be approved by WIPO's next general assembly, which will not be held before next autumn, diplomats noted. The need to update the existing treaty, which pre-dates much of modern television technology, has been made more acute by a growing signal-piracy problem in many parts of the world. Signal piracy, a problem particularly affecting developing countries, was growing at between 11 and 14 percent a year in Asia, leading to significant loss of income for broadcasters, Hayes said. Piracy is one thing on which states agree on the need to act, with some developing countries, led by Brazil, Argentina, India and Egypt, seeking to limit the scope of the treaty largely to that issue. Their stance is backed by many activist organizations, which question whether the broadcasters need any further protection than that already given them by international copyright and other existing forms of intellectual property protection. The scope of a future treaty, as well as the duration of any protection granted, are two of the issues still outstanding, U.N. officials said. Some countries want the period of protection limited to 20 years, while others are pushing for 50. *** FAIR USE NOTICE. This message contains copyrighted material the use of which has not been specifically authorized by the copyright owner. This Internet discussion group is making it available without profit to group members who have expressed a prior interest in receiving the included information in their efforts to advance the understanding of literary, educational, political, and economic issues, for non-profit research and educational purposes only. I believe that this constitutes a 'fair use' of the copyrighted material as provided for in section 107 of the U.S. Copyright Law. If you wish to use this copyrighted material for purposes of your own that go beyond 'fair use,' you must obtain permission from the copyright owner, in this instance, Reuters News Service. For more information go to: http://www.law.cornell.edu/uscode/17/107.shtml ------------------------------ Date: Mon, 22 Nov 2004 12:41:22 EST From: Telecom dailyLead from USTA Subject: Phone, Satellite Alliances Seize Ground With Service Packages Telecom dailyLead from USTA November 22, 2004 http://www.dailylead.com/latestIssue.jsp?i=17680&l=2017006 TODAY'S HEADLINES NEWS OF THE DAY * Phone, satellite alliances seize ground with service packages BUSINESS & INDUSTRY WATCH * BT joins mobile phone fray * Verizon's SuperPages.com launches online shopping tool * AOL switching focus to selling online ads * Nokia's strategy chief leaves company USTA SPOTLIGHT * "3G Wireless with WiMAX and Wi-Fi" -- Now in the Telecom Bookstore EMERGING TECHNOLOGIES * Microsoft hopes seniors will embrace its Web TV effort REGULATORY & LEGISLATIVE * Congress approves three-year Internet tax ban * Qwest wins Colorado contract Follow the link below to read quick summaries of these stories and others. http://www.dailylead.com/latestIssue.jsp?i=17680&l=2017006 Legal and Privacy information at http://www.dailylead.com/about/privacy_legal.jsp SmartBrief, Inc. 1100 H ST NW, Suite 1000 Washington, DC 20005 ------------------------------ From: hancock4@bbs.cpcn.com (Lisa Hancock) Subject: Re: The Pitfalls of VoIP Date: 21 Nov 2004 19:32:26 -0800 Organization: http://groups.google.com Lisa Minter wrote > I'm not saying there's any > such quid pro quo in the case of this specific story, just that the > increase in negative stories about VoIP in the press has me wondering. Perhaps they are legitimate concerns. Newsweek did a piece on VoIP with some precautions that seemed reasonable. If the broadband channel you are using gets busy, your telephone call may have difficulty. This is only reasonable; any new technology takes time to get the bugs out of it. ------------------------------ From: hancock4@bbs.cpcn.com (Jeff nor Lisa) Subject: Re: The Persuaders Date: 22 Nov 2004 08:02:51 -0800 Organization: http://groups.google.com Monty Solomon wrote: > In "The Persuaders," FRONTLINE explores how the cultures of > marketing and advertising have come to influence not only what > Americans buy, but also how they view themselves and the world > around them. ... This should be an interesting piece, but it is not current news. There were a number of books written in the 1950s about this sort of thing, especially as TV was taking hold on the US. It has also been well documented that advertisers can influence the public only to a point, then the public will do what it wants. For example, in the 1980s, all of Detroit's aggressive advertising couldn't convince motorists to buy their cars -- motorists were buying imports instead. For many reasons, sometimes products just fail in the marketplace and no amount of advertising can move them ("new Coke" anyone?). Other times products become a big success with very little advertising. Most people think of "advertising" and "marketing" as the same thing, but they're not. Advertising is only one component of marketing. Distribution, post-sale support (if appropriate), packaging, pricing, etc. all play a big role. For example, there is nothing special about a hamburger from McDonald's, but the way that hamburger is made and sold to you was a major innovation in the quick-serve restaurant business. > Take the 2004 presidential sweepstakes for example. Both the > Republicans and the Democrats were prepared to go to extraordinary > lengths to custom craft their messages. "What politicians do is tailor > their message to each demographic group," .... This is nothing new. All modern communications does is make it more _efficient_ to what they've been doing all along. In the old days politicians travelled the stump, driving from town to town. The candidate would stop at each courthouse or general store and say a few words to whoever was gathered there. It was grueling work. Talks were tuned to the audience of the particular town; obviously city dwellers had different interests than rural people. In the big cities there was a political "machine" of many local people who spread the word on candidates. President Truman came out of such a machine in Kansas City, and that association tainted him until he proved his integrity and independence. > ... It hardens the partisanship > that's been such a feature of recent American politics." When I read about campaigns and practices of US politics of the 1920s and 1930s, I see no shortage of viscious partisanship. In the early 1930s, for example, the Democratic majority in Congress blocked some Depression relief measures President Hoover proposed. The Dems wanted Hoover to get full blame for the Depression and not any credit for any fixes. [A good on this subject: "The Political Biography of James F. Byrnes"]. Politics is and was hardball, thrown fast and without a glove. > Political marketers are just now discovering new ways to use the > techniques that have long been employed by the private sector. This was done for Eisenhower's campaign. He didn't like it, but he went along with it. Again, modern technologies allows greater efficiencies than in the past, but the basic method of operation remains unchanged. PBS "Frontline" has interesting shows but they are by no means the journalistic record; they represent a particular point of view. A few years ago they did a piece on a suburban Atlanta town which had a syphllis epidemic among young teenagers. Some viewers got the impression that all the young teens of that town were bored and thus "active" to kill time, which was not the case. I felt their most recent piece on Walmart wasn't quite right, either. ------------------------------ From: hancock4@bbs.cpcn.com (Lisa Hancock) Subject: Re: Sears and K-Mart Date: 22 Nov 2004 08:27:19 -0800 > [TELECOM Digest Editor's Note: Yet, they have the temerity to wonder > 'why customers go postal' sometimes ... and your two reasons given for > why there are no more (or very few) public offices available any longer > does not explain how small independent telcos still manage to do it: I strongly doubt that all independent telcos have a public office in every town they serve. They may have some offices here and there, but not necessarily within convenient reach of every customer. > Making floor space available for chairs and the cost of rent is an > equal problem for them. And I would suppose theoretically the problem > of someone 'going postal' is also worth considering. But why do you > suppose the small, non-Bell telcos don't have those problems, and can > continue to operate their public facilities? My feeling is that the concerns and costs are _not_ equal. The security is not just for someone "going postal", but also for more conventional crime like holdups or disorderly patrons. Operating such a center in a big city than a small town has more risks. I remember the Bell office downtown -- the whole place had heavy locks and walls, with tellers behind security windows. I think if you wanted to talk to someone it was like talking to someone through a glass like in prison. (And this was 30 years ago!) Unfortunately, urban life was the way it is. If someone "went off" it wasn't so much they were made at the phone company (or whereever they happened to be at), rather, they were frustrated with their miserable own life in general and had to vent -- sometimes violently. Sadly, a lot of people don't manage their personal lives very well (like paying bills on time) and their lives get messed up, so they're angry. They take it out on whoever happens to be nearby. It only takes one person out of 1,000 visitors to terrorize a staff. In community service I've seen, usually the most angry people have been those that have been the most irresponsible. Also, some major companies become the target of political protest movements who hold sit-ins. For example, a local Bell office would get targeted for a forced shutdown because the protesters are angry that Western Electric had defense contracts; today protesters have a renewed hatred of business. Eliminating the office eliminates that risk. Generally, offices in pleasant small towns don't have those security problems. As to the costs of running an office, the rent in a small town main street will be much less than in a downtown city. The incremental cost of providing customer space would be modest. Further, the office might double has an office for engineers and contractors who have business with the phone company, so adding a few POTS customers here and there is no big deal -- in other words, a receptionist and waiting room are already there. In contrast, a big phone company in a city could get flooded with customers and would need much more expensive space. ------------------------------ From: dold@XReXXWhatX.usenet.us.com Subject: Re: What Wal-Mart Knows About Customers' Habits Date: Mon, 22 Nov 2004 02:19:25 UTC Organization: a2i network Robert Bonomi wrote: > First, it is not clear that WalMart is actually doing this (title > remains with distributor), today. Walmart wants to implement the new inventory plan at the end of the move to RFID. I don't know why those two are related. Clarence A Dold - Hidden Valley (Lake County) CA USA 38.8-122.5 ------------------------------ Organization: Robert Bonomi Consulting Subject: Re: What Wal-Mart Knows About Customers' Habits From: bonomi@host122.r-bonomi.com (Robert Bonomi) Date: Mon, 22 Nov 2004 09:11:17 +0000 In article , the Moderator pontificates: > [TELECOM Digest Editor's Note: Have you ever considered applying for a > job as a Walmart 'customer service' representative? You already have > their list of excuses perfectly memorized. Facts _are_ facts. Even when you don't like them. I don't know diddly-squat about Walmart's operations. I _do_ happen to worked on charge-processing software, and written clearing- house interfaces. I _know_ what/where the possible failure modes are, and the checks that are there, both real-time and otherwise, to detect them. > When I first called then > went back to the store, for all I knew, the clerk *had* swiped me > three times, then took the money out of the register for the two > additional swipes and pocketed it. I've been in a Walmart precisely _once_ in my life (BB's are d*mn hard to find in the big cities these days -- the kid at the local hardware store said "what are BBs?" *sigh* Walmart is about the *only* place in the area that has 'em. I wasn't going shooting, I just needed a bunch of 'em as lightweight ball-bearings. Anyway ...) In that store, and in *every* *other*store*of*any*type* that takes 'mixed bag' (debit, credit, check, ATM) cards that I've been in in the last circa 10 years, the card NEVER LEAVES THE CUSTOMER'S HAND. Now, maybe your store _is_ different in that respect, but I take leave to doubt it. The fact that the card remains in the customer's possession are some of the "basic protections" against 'employee theft' fraud that are usually required by contract from (a) the card issuer, and (b) the clearing-house, before you can process such cards. (For precessing credit/debit cards _only_, the requirements are not as strict.) > There had been an article in the Independence Reporter a few days > earlier about a cashier at Walmart who had gotten arrested for > stealing several thousand dollars from the store and some customers. There are *very* limited ways for a cashier to themselves steal cash money 'from the store', and approximately _one_ way to steal from the customers, with 'computerized' registers. Doing multiple charges against a card is simply *not* one of them. The audit trail catches it at the end-of-shift, or over-night, at worst. And the records point directly to the perp. Stealing from the customer involves either 'under-counting' cash he gives you to pay for a purchase, or 'short-changing' what you give back. A cashier, and customer, _in_collusion_, can steal merchandise from the store, by the simple expedient of the cashier 'failing to ring' the item as it passes to the sacking area. Stealing money from the till is a real problem. There is a known count (counted by _several_ people, including you) in the till when you start, every sale is recorded, how much money is given in, and how much change is given out, are also recorded. If you over-state the amount of money given in, the amount of change is over-stated by exactly the same amount. Excess credits, or coupons show on the amount due from the customer, and the customer expects to pay only what is shown as 'due'. If you 'over-charge' for items, the computer expects _that_ money to be in the till. If you 'under-charge', the customer does not expect to -pay- that undercharged amount. At end-of-shift there is, again, a multiple-person 'count' of the money in the till. It had _better_ match what the computer 'says' should be there. If the count is 'short', you're a suspect for stealing from the company; and, if it is 'long', you're a suspect for short-changing customers. Really_ small amounts, like 10 cents or less, _may_ get overlooked. Unless they happen frequently. *Many* years ago, a cashier got caught -- he was systematically short-changing customers -- _because_ when the count for his till was off, it was _always_ on the high side. He didn't want the store to 'suspect' he was stealing, so he made sure that any error was in the store's favor. [.. munch ..]] > They did **not** check any tapes or logs to either > verify or deny what I said, just saying 'it could not have happened > because our procedures call for X followed by Y and Z.' Bringing up the possibility of 'employee theft' early on, putting them on the defensive -- was *not* particularly smart. At least, not if you wanted their help in getting to the bottom of things. If the card never leaves your hand, they are correct. it could *not* happened via multiple swipes. *Unless* _you_ did it, in which case it =is= valid multiple charges. :) Whether you believe it or not, the 'customer premises equipment' for swiping the card, and transmitting the information upstream to the clearinghouse is the *most*extensively*tested* part of the entire system, and the _second_least_ likely place for there to be any problems. (The least likely place is the interaction between the cash register and the card reader -- because it is a -series- of steps that all must occur in the proper sequence. If anything goes wrong part-way through, the only recovery is 'cancel and start over from the beginning', and *nothing* goes upstream until the entire sequence is completed.) *Almost*invariably* when something of this sort happens, it is a communications_ problem _between_ two systems. In broad, as follows: System 'a' sends a transaction to system 'b'; system 'b' sends an 'ack' back to system 'a'. *BUT* system 'a' "sees" an error return from 'b', instead of the 'ack'. FAILURE #1 Because it got an 'error' response 'a' *re-sends* the transaction. System 'b' _should_ catch this, because it has the same 'transaction ID' as a prior one that was already processed. Postulate the ID got garbled on the re-send. FAILURE #2. B now 'acks' _this_ transaction (this is the second time it has seen and acked what should have been a single transaction). System 'a' 'sees' the ack and moves on to the next transaction. Result: 'a' thinks it has submitted the transaction _once_, 'b' thinks it has received *two* separate transactions. The discrepancy shows *only* when the 'end-of-day' (shift, whatever) totals are compared between the two systems. One _cannot_ prevent this kind of problem from =ever= happening. One can take steps to (a) make it unlikely, and (b) ensure that it is -detected- after-the-fact, in a 'relatively timely' manner. > I've also told Bob Donaldson (local Walmart manager) that his store > security officers were pretty obnoxious also and that he should fire > them and get more responsible guys to work at his store, and that he > might start getting people to work there who helped customers out to > their car or taxi with shopping bags, or made home delivery like other > stores in town do. The whole place is really a dreadful store. PAT] Yup. That's why you shop there. It's dreadful, and doesn't provide the services you want. Helping customers out to their car or taxi, or making home deliveries COSTS MONEY. Surprisingly _large_ amounts of money. Walmart sells 'low prices', not 'service'. If you want service, go 'somewhere else', and pay more. Available evidence says that _most_ people prefer 'low prices' to 'service'. This is not the fault of the _store_. I do a fair amount of my shopping at 'no frills' stores. I do *not* expect 'full service' from those stores; I *do* expect their prices to reflect that they are not 'full service'. I _also_ shop at some 'full price' stores. *Because* of the 'service' they provide. Like knowing _where_ to refer me, when they are 'not the right source' for what I'm looking for -- saving me _hours_ of research. That *is* worth 'paying extra' for, so they continue to get my business. They also carry a 'better grade' of product, so when I'm looking for 'quality', I go there first. [TELECOM Digest Editor's Note: You are generally correct as far as the plastic never leaving my hands. At the bank of cash registers, there is an LED screen facing the cashier and a side facing the customer. The side facing me had a place to slide your card, and a keypad to enter your PIN as needed. The cashier slides your item across a glass thing which examines it and reads the bar code, the the register makes a 'ping' noise and the display screen says what the item was and how much it costs. If the register does not make its 'ping noise' they slide it over the glass again until the register *does* ping. If it never will ping (I have seen that happen, then the cashier manually enters the price on the keypad on that side, But they work so rapidly I cannot keep up with them. With a debit card if you want cash back, you tell the cashier and that amount is added to the total you paid, and it is treated like amount due, total tendered (sale plus cash back) and change due (amount of the cash back). Bob Donaldson told me once that each cashier has to check their money box out of the office when they start their shift. But in the customer service office, it is different. If you want to purchase a money order for example, you cannot use a credit card, only a debit card (bank/ATM card). So they want to take your card, look at it, etc. When the computer finishes printing up your money orders or your postage stamps (and other things you buy in that area) then the customer service person swipes your card on her side of the counter. I do not shop at Independence Walmart because of the dreadful service and things they do not do; I shop there *in spite of all that* when I cannot get an item elsewhere or I happen to be at my hair dresser which is a block north and happen to recall something I need to get to take back home with me. Very rarely do I go there; usually I just call Jeff and tell him to come back to Klassy Klippers and get me to go back home, and *maybe*/maybe not as needed I have him stop downtown for me to get something on the way back. PAT] ------------------------------ From: Dave VanHorn Subject: Re: What Wal-Mart Knows About Customers' Habits Date: Sun, 21 Nov 2004 19:22:38 -0500 > Earlier this year I went to Walmart to get something, and used my > debit card to pay for it. When I got home I checked the computer and > there were *three* identical charges instead of only one. I called > and went back to Walmart, all they would say is 'not our problem, we > did not swipe you three times, we only swiped you once. The problem > got corrected in a couple days, but Walmart never admitted to any > part of it. PAT] Normally, this sort of thing is caused by not using transaction sequence numbers in the packets. Terminal sends a packet, host acks, the ack gets corrupted into a nak, and the terminal re-sends. The terminal eventually gets a good ack, and thinks it's only done one transaction, but the host sees multiple identical transactions, and believes they are independent. Adding a sequence number makes finding dupes trivial. This is not probably something that WM has any direct control over though. [TELECOM Digest Editor's Note: What you say is true, but I have been in other stores when the same kind of problem came up, and they at least apologize for any confusion and offer some free gift or coupon for the trouble. Not Walmart though. Our Chamber of Commerce has a thing called 'Main Street Gift Certificates'. They sell them to you in any denomination wanted, and they are redeemable at almost any store in town. They are great to give as gifts when you do not know what to give the other person, or they can be used for food at several restaurants. The redemptor turns them in to the Chamber office less a *one percent* administrative fee. Walmart, which refuses to belong to the Chamber of Commerce also refuses to accept those gift certificates; I guess they do not feel they should have to pay the one percent administrative fee charged the redemptors. PAT] ------------------------------ From: Paul A Lee Subject: Re: What Wal-Mart Knows About Customers' Habits Date: Mon, 22 Nov 2004 12:39:50 -0500 Organization: Rite Aid Corporation In TELECOM Digest V23 #555, NoSpamForMe wrote (in part): > Why is it OK for the a big chain like Walgreen's (or CVS, > Rite-Aid, etc.) to come into a town and drive the little > independent drugstores out of business ... indeed you salute > them for opening a new store in your downtown More often than not, when a Rite Aid pharmacy replaces a little independent drugstore", we acquire and "pour over" the pharmacy business into a new or nearby existing Rite Aid store. Many times, Rite Aid "saves" a small, pharmacist-owned store by purchasing it for a tidy sum when its business is dwindling, but still profitable. Typically, most of the pharmacy staff and at least some of the front end staff are offered positions with Rite Aid. Our Esteemed Editor then noted (in part): > I was not praising Goddess for *Walgreens* opening a store > here so much as I was praising any business for opening in > our slowly decaying, beginning to show signs of wear and tear > downtown. Likewise, Rite Aid has put stores into many locations _after_ a neighborhood store or another chain has abandoned the area. We've done architectural matching, historical restorations, and some unique constructions for urban sites. By the way, there's no hyphen (but there is a space) in "Rite Aid". Similarly, there's no hyphen (or space) in "Kmart" (even though it's often written as "K-mart"), and there _is_ a hyphen in "Wal-Mart" (even though it's often written as "WalMart"). You don't have to take my word for it -- just check the legalese at the respectively eponymous web sites. Please note that I do *not* speak "officially" for Rite Aid -- these are just my observations of practices that are part of the public record. Paul A Lee Sr Telecom Engineer Rite Aid Corporation HL-IS-COM (Telecomm) V: +1 717 730-8355 30 Hunter Lane, Camp Hill, PA 17011-2410 F: +1 717 975-3789 P.O. Box 3165, Harrisburg, PA 17105-3165 W: +1 717 805-6208 [TELECOM Digest Editor's Note: That is why Walgreen's is getting a good reception here, even though they will not be open for at least six or eight more months. (They are bulding from scratch where the old Alf Landon [former Kansas governor] house sits). Walgreen's has already joined our Chamber of Commerce, and they plan to build a very nice looking store at 9th and Maple, and have stated they will work with the community, at the last town council meeting a few weeks ago. PAT] ------------------------------ From: Paul A Lee Subject: Re: How Do I Learn an Unknown Number? Date: Mon, 22 Nov 2004 16:08:11 -0500 Organization: Rite Aid Corporation In TELECOM Digest V23 #561, rekingus@yahoo.com (reking) wrote (in part): > Anyone know how I can retrieve a phone number for a line that=0D > I have recently discovered within our business. Hook up a butt set or a phone set you have lying around and call your cell phone. Read the CPN from the display. > SBC is our carrier but they tell me I would have to have=0D > someone come out and trace the line at a charge. If you know the location of SBC's demarcation point ("demarc"), network interface device (NID, pronounced "nid"), or minimum point of entry (MPoE, pronounced "EM-poe") serving your location, trace the line in question back to that point. If the phone number or circuit number is not legibly and accurately marked there, then SBC is obliged to come out and so mark it without charge to you. This is a repair issue, and a line that is not identified at the demarc is considered a service problem on the carrier's side of the demarc. The only legitimate reasons they would have to charge you are if you had them trace inside wiring back to the demarc, or if the demarc were damaged or defaced even though it was under your control. If the demarc is outside and accessible to others without your knowledge, even a damaged or defaced NID is the carrier's responsibility. If SBC gives you any static about it, let them know that you'll be checking their claims with your state's public utilities or public service commission. Find it through the following: http://www.naruc.org/displaycommon.cfm?an=3D15 You may wind up at the bottom of their repair schedule, but they're still obliged to show up -- within 10 business days, typically, absent any weather emergency or disaster affecting phone service. Paul A Lee Sr Telecom Engineer Rite Aid Corporation HL-IS-COM (Telecomm) V: +1 717 730-8355 30 Hunter Lane, Camp Hill, PA 17011-2410 F: +1 717 975-3789 P.O. Box 3165, Harrisburg, PA 17105-3165 W: +1 717 805-6208 ------------------------------ From: Dave VanHorn Subject: Last Laugh! Re: Should I Put Cell Phone on National No Call List? Date: Sun, 21 Nov 2004 19:24:09 -0500 You frequently hear that "we do not sell our customer list".. Of course not! The rent or lease them! ------------------------------ TELECOM Digest is an electronic journal devoted mostly but not exclusively to telecommunications topics. It is circulated anywhere there is email, in addition to various telecom forums on a variety of networks such as Compuserve and America On Line, Yahoo Groups, and other forums. It is also gatewayed to Usenet where it appears as the moderated newsgroup 'comp.dcom.telecom'. TELECOM Digest is a not-for-profit, mostly non-commercial educational service offered to the Internet by Patrick Townson. All the contents of the Digest are compilation-copyrighted. You may reprint articles in some other media on an occasional basis, but please attribute my work and that of the original author. Contact information: Patrick Townson/TELECOM Digest Post Office Box 50 Independence, KS 67301 Phone: 620-402-0134 Fax 1: 775-255-9970 Fax 2: 530-309-7234 Fax 3: 208-692-5145 Email: editor@telecom-digest.org Subscribe: telecom-subscribe@telecom-digest.org Unsubscribe:telecom-unsubscribe@telecom-digest.org This Digest is the oldest continuing e-journal about telecomm- unications on the Internet, having been founded in August, 1981 and published continuously since then. Our archives are available for your review/research. We believe we are the oldest e-zine/mailing list on the internet in any category! URL information: http://telecom-digest.org Anonymous FTP: mirror.lcs.mit.edu/telecom-archives/archives/ (or use our mirror site: ftp.epix.net/pub/telecom-archives) Email <==> FTP: telecom-archives@telecom-digest.org Send a simple, one line note to that automated address for a help file on how to use the automatic retrieval system for archives files. You can get desired files in email. ************************************************************************* * TELECOM Digest is partially funded by a grant from * * Judith Oppenheimer, President of ICB Inc. and purveyor of accurate * * 800 & Dot Com News, Intelligence, Analysis, and Consulting. * * http://ICBTollFree.com, http://1800TheExpert.com * * Views expressed herein should not be construed as representing * * views of Judith Oppenheimer or ICB Inc. * ************************************************************************* ICB Toll Free News. Contact information is not sold, rented or leased. One click a day feeds a person a meal. Go to http://www.thehungersite.com Copyright 2004 ICB, Inc. and TELECOM Digest. All rights reserved. Our attorney is Bill Levant, of Blue Bell, PA. ************************ DIRECTORY ASSISTANCE JUST 65 CENTS ONE OR TWO INQUIRIES CHARGED TO YOUR CREDIT CARD! REAL TIME, UP TO DATE! SPONSORED BY TELECOM DIGEST AND EASY411.COM SIGN UP AT http://www.easy411.com/telecomdigest ! ************************ --------------------------------------------------------------- Finally, the Digest is funded by gifts from generous readers such as yourself who provide funding in amounts deemed appropriate. Your help is important and appreciated. A suggested donation of fifty dollars per year per reader is considered appropriate. See our address above. Please make at least a single donation to cover the cost of processing your name to the mailing list. All opinions expressed herein are deemed to be those of the author. Any organizations listed are for identification purposes only and messages should not be considered any official expression by the organization. End of TELECOM Digest V23 #562 ****************************** From editor@telecom-digest.org Tue Nov 23 15:36:44 2004 Received: (from ptownson@localhost) by massis.lcs.mit.edu (8.11.6p3/8.11.6) id iANKahD16228; Tue, 23 Nov 2004 15:36:44 -0500 (EST) Date: Tue, 23 Nov 2004 15:36:44 -0500 (EST) From: editor@telecom-digest.org Message-Id: <200411232036.iANKahD16228@massis.lcs.mit.edu> X-Authentication-Warning: massis.lcs.mit.edu: ptownson set sender to editor@telecom-digest.org using -f To: ptownson Approved: patsnewlist Subject: TELECOM Digest V23 #563 TELECOM Digest Tue, 23 Nov 2004 15:36:00 EST Volume 23 : Issue 563 Inside This Issue: Editor: Patrick A. Townson Nude Photo Publisher Perfect 10 Sues Google (Lisa Minter) Bofra exploit hits The Register ad serving supplier (Monty Solomon) WiFi Centrino RANGE Increase POSSIBLE? (Michal) Re: What Wal-Mart Knows About Customers' Habits (Steve Sobol) Re: What Wal-Mart Knows About Customers' Habits (Lisa Hancock) Re: Sears and K-Mart (Scott Dorsey) Re: Sears and K-Mart (Steve Sobol) Re: Sears and K-Mart (Robert Bonomi) Re: Dropping SBC For a VoIP Solution - Vonage or Packet8? (John McHarry) Re: How Do I Learn an Unknown Number? (Nathan Strom) Re: Trial Shows How Spammers Operate (Scott Dorsey) Re: Anyone Having any Luck With Google Ads? (Gary Breuckman) Re: EFF: Anti-Spam Measures Block Free Speech (Scott Dorsey) Re: The Persuaders (Thomas A. Horsley) Deja Vu All Over Again (Patrick Townson) Last Laugh! Online Casino Buys Virgin Mary Sandwich For $28,000 (Minter) Last Laugh! Ordering a Pizza by Phone in 2008 (Patrick Townson) All contents here are copyrighted by Patrick Townson and the individual writers/correspondents. Articles may be used in other journals or newsgroups, provided the writer's name and the Digest are included in the fair use quote. By using -any name or email address- included herein for -any- reason other than responding to an article herein, you agree to pay a hundred dollars to the recipients of the email. =========================== Addresses herein are not to be added to any mailing list, nor to be sold or given away without explicit written consent. Chain letters, viruses, porn, spam, and miscellaneous junk are definitely unwelcome. We must fight spam for the same reason we fight crime: not because we are naive enough to believe that we will ever stamp it out, but because we do not want the kind of world that results when no one stands against crime. Geoffrey Welsh =========================== See the bottom of this issue for subscription and archive details and the name of our lawyer; other stuff of interest. ---------------------------------------------------------------------- From: Lisa Minter Subject: Nude Photo Publisher Perfect 10 Sues Google Date: Tue, 23 Nov 2004 12:02:54 EST By Lisa Baertlein SAN FRANCISCO (Reuters) - A California-based pornographer said on Monday it has sued Google Inc. alleging that its leading Internet search engines are illegally allowing people to view hijacked versions of its nude photos and to access its Web site with stolen passwords. Perfect 10 -- whose current slogan is "The World's Most Beautiful Natural Women" -- alleged in a lawsuit filed in federal court in Los Angeles on Friday that Google's image search engine gives users illegal access to photos it owns and produced, violating copyrights and harming its ability to profit from the distribution of the photos via its magazine and Web site. Further, a Google Web search for "perfect10.com passwords" serves up a list of usernames and passwords that would enable searchers to access Perfect 10's Web site and bypass its $25.50 monthly membership fee. "They're showing the pictures from my magazine and my Web site for free so there's no reason for anyone to buy my products. To add insult to injury, they give away my user names and passwords," said Norm Zada, president of Beverly Hills, California-based Perfect 10. Zada added that his company had sent almost 30 formal requests to Google, asking the newly public company to remove the photos and password lists from its search results. He said it sued after being dissatisfied with Google's response. In its lawsuit, Perfect 10 charges Google with copyright and trademark infringement and circumvention of copyright protection systems. It further alleges trademark dilution, unfair competition and violation of rights of publicity. The lawsuit seeks unspecified damages. Google (GOOG.O) had not reviewed the lawsuit, said a spokesman, who declined further comment. In 2002, a federal appeals court ruled that Web sites may reproduce and post "thumbnail" or down-sized versions of copyrighted photographs. Nevertheless, it said displaying full-sized copies of photographs is a copyright violation. Google's image search results show photographic thumbnails. Some of those thumbnails link to sites that Perfect 10 said are illegally displaying full-sized photographs it owns. Earlier this year, Perfect 10 sued Visa, MasterCard and other financial institutions, alleging they facilitated and have profited from the illegal sale of pirated sex images flooding the Internet and thus should bear responsibility for any related copyright violations. Google, which went public in mid-August and runs a very profitable advertising business, has been hit with several intellectual property lawsuits from advertisers seeking to protect their trademarks. *** FAIR USE NOTICE. This message contains copyrighted material the use of which has not been specifically authorized by the copyright owner. This Internet discussion group is making it available without profit to group members who have expressed a prior interest in receiving the included information in their efforts to advance the understanding of literary, educational, political, and economic issues, for non-profit research and educational purposes only. I believe that this constitutes a 'fair use' of the copyrighted material as provided for in section 107 of the U.S. Copyright Law. If you wish to use this copyrighted material for purposes of your own that go beyond 'fair use,' you must obtain permission from the copyright owner, in this instance, Reuters News Service. . For more information go to: http://www.law.cornell.edu/uscode/17/107.shtml ------------------------------ Date: Tue, 23 Nov 2004 09:20:27 -0500 From: Monty Solomon Subject: Bofra Exploit Hits The Register Ad Serving Supplier http://www.theregister.co.uk/2004/11/21/register_adserver_attack/ Bofra exploit hits our ad serving supplier By Team Register Published Sunday 21st November 2004 16:18 GMT Important notice Early on Saturday morning some banner advertising served for The Register by third party ad serving company Falk AG became infected with the Bofra/IFrame exploit. The Register suspended ad serving by this company on discovery of the problem. Bofra/IFrame is a currently unpatched exploit which affects Internet Explorer 6.0 on all Windows platforms bar Windows XP SP2. If you may have visited The Register between 6am and 12.30pm GMT on Saturday, Nov 20 using any Windows platform bar XP SP2 we strongly advise you to check your machine with up to date anti-virus software, to install SP2 if you are running Windows XP, and to strongly consider running an alternative browser, at least until Microsoft deals with the issue. We have asked Falk for an explanation and for further details of the incident, and pending this we do not intend to restart ad-serving via the company. Falk will, we understand, be making a statement regarding the matter on Monday. Although the matter was beyond our direct control, we do not regard it as acceptable for any Register reader to be exposed in this way, and wish to apologise sincerely to anyone who was. Further information about this particular exploit is available here or here. http://www.theregister.co.uk/2004/11/04/ie_iframe_vuln/ http://www.theregister.co.uk/2004/11/10/bofra_worm/ ------------------------------ From: michalkuls@o2.pl (Michal) Subject: WiFi Centrino RANGE Increase POSSIBLE? Date: 23 Nov 2004 06:37:07 -0800 Organization: http://groups.google.com Hi, I have a Toshiba A50-101 which is Centrino (with Wifi of course) I'm using Wifi access point from Linksys named WAG54G. I need to use the computer on other floor than the access point is. It works really poor. The wifi range is not sufficient. Is it possible to increase my wifi range by using some sort of PCMCIA antenna or something? Thanks for any advice! Regards, Mike [TELECOM Digest Editor's Note: I increased my range *a little* using an EZ-10 thing (see the EZ-10 web site). Basically, it uses tin-foil around the antenna on the base unit to reflect the signal, or push it forward. Considering its cost (free, with construction time about ten minutes) you might want to see if it helps a little. PAT] ------------------------------ From: Steve Sobol Subject: Re: What Wal-Mart Knows About Customers' Habits Date: Mon, 22 Nov 2004 14:13:12 -0800 Organization: Glorb Internet Services, http://www.glorb.com Robert Bonomi wrote: > I've been in a Walmart precisely _once_ in my life (BB's are d*mn > hard to find in the big cities these days -- the kid at the local > hardware store said "what are BBs?" *sigh* Walmart is about the > *only* place in the area that has 'em. I wasn't going shooting, I > just needed a bunch of 'em as lightweight ball-bearings. Anyway ...) > In that store, and in *every* *other*store*of*any*type* that takes > 'mixed bag' (debit, credit, check, ATM) cards that I've been in in the > last circa 10 years, the card NEVER LEAVES THE CUSTOMER'S HAND. I beg to differ, Sir. At our Wal*Mart, you can swipe the card yourself but more often than not, out of habit, I hand the card to the cashier anyhow and she swipes it. Same with grocery stores, etc. Generally people do swipe the cards themselves but that is NOT always the case. Then TELECOM Digest Editor noted in partial response: > But in the customer service office, it is different. If you want to > purchase a money order for example, you cannot use a credit card, only > a debit card (bank/ATM card). So they want to take your card, look at > it, etc. When the computer finishes printing up your money orders or > your postage stamps (and other things you buy in that area) then the > customer service person swipes your card on her side of the counter. Well, yeah; if I'm giving you a cash equivalent (money order, for example), I'm going to make damned sure that the transaction goes through. So, yes, I'm going to take extra precautions to that end. I'm not, however, arguing that your Wal*Mart is wonderful. It's entirely possible that it is horrid. Just making a couple counterpoints to your points. Paul A Lee wrote: >> Why is it OK for the a big chain like Walgreen's (or CVS, >> Rite-Aid, etc.) to come into a town and drive the little >> independent drugstores out of business ... indeed you salute >> them for opening a new store in your downtown > More often than not, when a Rite Aid pharmacy replaces a little > independent drugstore", we acquire and "pour over" the pharmacy > business into a new or nearby existing Rite Aid store. I didn't know this. If the Rite Aid five minutes from my house didn't have absolutely horrendous customer service, this would be another reason to shop there. (Front-end is ok, but the pharmacy employees are all jerks. The other area Rite Aids have decent employees working for them, and good customer service, and I've complained to the regional manager about my neighborhood store and perhaps he's fixed things up by now.) The important thing is that, in this area, when Rite Aid bought the local Thrifty drug stores, they kept the Thrifty ice-cream counters! :) (You gotta have priorities!) JustThe.net Internet & New Media Services, http://JustThe.net/ Steven J. Sobol, Geek In Charge / 888.480.4NET (4638) / sjsobol@JustThe.net PGP Key available from your friendly local key server (0xE3AE35ED) Apple Valley, California Nothing scares me anymore. I have three kids. ------------------------------ From: hancock4@bbs.cpcn.com (Lisa Hancock) Subject: Re: What Wal-Mart Knows About Customers' Habits Date: 23 Nov 2004 08:04:49 -0800 Organization: http://groups.google.com bonomi@host122.r-bonomi.com (Robert Bonomi) wrote > Doing multiple charges against a card is simply *not* one of them. > The audit trail catches it at the end-of-shift, or over-night, at > worst. And the records point directly to the perp. An audit trail works only if someone actually reads and checks the audit trail. There have been many crimes of stealing because an audited wasn't conducted until a long time (sometimes years) after the transaction, or all the money finally disappeared. There was a recent case of an armored truck crew stealing from ATM machines they filled with cash. Apparently no one bothered to check how much cash was still in the ATM before they refilled it, so the crews could take that cash without accountability. For some reason, an awful lot of people today are terrified of simple income and balance sheet statements. Anyone involved in a business must read and understand these reports every month and watch for unusual transactions. From time to time a detailed external audit of every transaction is necessary. Many businesses -- large and small -- run into big trouble because no one is studying and understanding the monthly financial reports. > A cashier, and customer, _in_collusion_, can steal merchandise from > the store, by the simple expedient of the cashier 'failing to ring' > the item as it passes to the sacking area. Stores check for that by using (1) private detectives who come into a store and monitor employees and (2) CCTV cameras on the register. Stores that hire a lot of kids have to watch them giving free stuff to their friends or under-ringing. Apparently no one cares at all about youngsters selling cigarettes to their underage friends -- that practice is rampant. > Stealing money from the till is a real problem. There is a known > count (counted by _several_ people, including you) in the till when > you start, every sale is recorded, how much money is given in, and how > much change is given out, are also recorded. But is it checked by an independent person? Sometimes yes, sometimes no. In business, the issuing and receiving checks, the gross amounts received and disbursed need to be compared with the invoices and vouchers by a separate person as well as by outside auditors. People set up a phony accounts payable account which is actually themselves. Auditing checks vs. separately prepared vouchers helps prevents that. > Bringing up the possibility of 'employee theft' early on, putting them > on the defensive -- was *not* particularly smart. At least, not if > you wanted their help in getting to the bottom of things. One regional convenience store chain got into hot water by taking a very aggressive approach with this. When they suspected an employee of theft (ie eating a bag of potato chips without paying for it) they pulled them into a back room and threatened them with severe criminal charges unless they confessed and pleaded guilty to a minor charge, which most employees did out of fear regardless if they actually stole. IIRC, a major national chain used lie-detectors on hiring employees or on existing employees suspected of theft. [TELECOM Digest Editor's Note: Independence Walmart has some very young cashiers now and then and there was a problem where the kids were ringing up beer and cigarettes for their friends, etc. So does Marvins, but Walmart changed their system where any purchases of tobacco products have to be taken to *one single register* for handling. All tobacco products are stored at that one register, and whatever you ask for, the clerk gets it from the shelf and gives it to you (after payment). Beer on the other hand, because of its larger, bulky size can go through any register with your other purchases. I was in Walmart one day and they had all young kids at the registers. Some guy came though with his shopping cart full of stuff including a six-pack of some beer. The kid rings up *everything else* (moving the beer out the way on the conveyor belt, then he said into the overhead loudspeaker "twenty one! Register 7" and just stood there. The old biddy who works in the office there stuck her head out of the door, and looked over at him, then walked over to his register. *She* swiped the beer on the glass of the scanner, and put it in the plastic bags they use for customer merchandise, then turned the register back over to him, and waddled back to the office. The kid collected all the money but knew better than to touch or handle or 'be in possession of' the alcohol personally as Walmart stipulates. I guess the law requires them to have a person over the age of 21 make those sales. PAT] ------------------------------ From: kludge@panix.com (Scott Dorsey) Subject: Re: Sears and K-Mart Date: 23 Nov 2004 11:47:07 -0500 Organization: Former users of Netcom shell (1989-2000) In article , Thomas A. Horsley wrote: >> ...Frontier -- has at least some walk-in offices. I wonder what the >> Bells are so afraid of that non-Bells aren't ... > My impression has always been that they feel they are "The Phone > Company" and By God you ought to be using your $#@! phone to do > business with them. Many years ago I went to a local phone office to > try and solve some problem in the hope that speaking to a real person > would help, and all they did was put me on the phone with somebody > :-). "My phone doesn't work." "Sir, you need to call this number..." "But my phone doesn't work." --scott "C'est un Nagra. C'est suisse, et tres, tres precis." ------------------------------ From: Steve Sobol Subject: Re: Sears and K-Mart Date: Mon, 22 Nov 2004 14:06:03 -0800 Organization: Glorb Internet Services, http://www.glorb.com Lisa Hancock wrote: > As to the costs of running an office, the rent in a small town main > street will be much less than in a downtown city. The incremental > cost of providing customer space would be modest. > Further, the office might double has an office for engineers and > contractors who have business with the phone company, so adding a few > POTS customers here and there is no big deal -- in other words, a > receptionist and waiting room are already there. In contrast, a big > phone company in a city could get flooded with customers and would > need much more expensive space. Further to my comments about Verizon still owning and operating retail stores: Verizon has a large operation here in the Victor Valley. Aside from the five or six COs they have within fifteen mintues of each other, they have a Verizon Plus retail store and a call center operation. The Verizon call center in Victorville handles 411 directory assistance for Verizon landline and Verizon Wireless customers, and presumably also customers of other LECs and wireless providers. In addition, the Victorville CO on Mojave Drive is much larger than you'd normally expect a CO to be, and since there are a large number of company trucks, etc., in its parking lot, I assume it's some sort of regional service center. So it makes sense to have a human presence here, and they have had one at least since GTE and probably since back in the ConTel days (the call center still has an old sign out front that reads "GTE Employee Parking"). SBC is a different animal. Ameritech Ohio used to be headquartered in downtown Cleveland, at Erieview Plaza, and the Ameritech building did have walk-up windows for customers. SBC, while still maintaining corporate offices at Erieview, no longer has the space for customers, although they might have a Cingular Wireless store there (but for some reason I recall the closest Cingular corporate store being a few mintues away). I believe this is SOP for SBC ... JustThe.net Internet & New Media Services, http://JustThe.net/ Steven J. Sobol, Geek In Charge / 888.480.4NET (4638) / sjsobol@JustThe.net PGP Key available from your friendly local key server (0xE3AE35ED) Apple Valley, California Nothing scares me anymore. I have three kids. ------------------------------ Organization: Robert Bonomi Consulting Subject: Re: Sears and K-Mart From: bonomi@host122.r-bonomi.com (Robert Bonomi) Date: Tue, 23 Nov 2004 06:13:11 +0000 In article , Robert Bonomi wrote: [[.. munch ..]] > Beyond that, it is a matter of 'priorities'. Is 'cutting costs' more > important than 'customer convenience', or not? Everybody comes down > on a different side of that question on various things. Look at how > few companies have a live person answering the main phone number any > more, for one example. They figure that the cost savings of the d*mn > 'auto attendant' are 'worth' the increase in customer aggravation, and > wasted _customer_ time (after all *they* aren't paying for the > customer's time :). > [TELECOM Digest Editor's Note: Yet, they have the temerity to wonder > 'why customers go postal' sometimes ... and your two reasons given for > why there are no more (or very few) public offices available any longer > does not explain how small independent telcos still manage to do it: Yes, it *does*. Repeating from the above paragraph: "It is a matter of 'priorities'. The smaller telco has decided the additional cost _is_ worth it. The big telco has made a different decision. > Making floor space available for chairs and the cost of rent is an > equal problem for them. And I would suppose theoretically the problem > of someone 'going postal' is also worth considering. Actually, it is _not_ an 'equal' problem, as far as costs. Yes, it is an expense, but the magnitude of the expense is _considerably_ different. Whether you look at it in absolute dollar cost per square foot, -or- in terms of the price they sell their service for. It's strange, but the cost of 'basic' service from a traditional telephone company varies by only a factor of about 2, nation-wide. Rental pricing for an 'equivalent' (in terms of customer accessibility -- locale, transportation, 'convenience', etc.) 'storefront' space encompasses a range of more than 15:1. > But why do you suppose the small, non-Bell telcos don't have those > problems, Who says they "don't" have those problems? The same issues exist. The dollar-value of the costs may be significantly different. The _perception_ by the company of maintaining the service may be that it *is* =worth= a higher cost. It's not that they "don't have" those problems, but they either do not _have_them_to_the_same_degree_, or have 'valued' customer convenience differently. _What_ they use to make the decision, is a different matter from _why_ somebody comes down on a specific _side_ of a given issue. And "how" they went about making that decision is yet another issue. > and can continue to operate their public facilities? The answer to that, as anyone with intelligence above that of an idiot can plainly see, is: "Because they _choose_ do do so." They have made a 'business decision' that the additional 'hard dollar' costs _are_ worth the 'intangible benefit' in "customer satisfaction". Other companies have made a _different_ determination regarding the relative benefits vs costs. Maybe the costs are different. Maybe the perception of 'value' is different. In one case they decided value outweighs costs. In the other case, they decides that costs were higher than the value derived. The issue is not one of "can" vs. "can't". but "chose to" vs. "chose not to". The answer to _any_ question -- in the business world, at least -- that starts off "Why don't they ...", is *always* "Money". When two businesses make a different decision on the same subject, it is because either their 'costs' are different, or the *perceived* value of the benefit to the company is different. > Do you think if SBC were to outsource all its 'customer service' > functions to China or India they would be able to get rid of all > their pseudo problems with finding good, cheap real estate? PAT] A question resting on a false assumption (i.e., that it is a 'pseudo problem') has no meaningful answers. That aside, one of the 'attractions' (to management) of 'off-shore' outsourcing of *anything* IS that 'costs' are lower, Often _dramatically_ lower. Many times enough lower to more than offset the increased costs of having the job done in a 'remote' location. The straight 'hard-dollar' economic-analysis makes such actions nearly _irresistible_. Only when one factors in the (sometimes -major-) negative impact on 'customer satisfaction' does _any_ question arise. ------------------------------ From: John McHarry Subject: Re: Dropping SBC For a VoIP Solution -- Vonage or Packet8 ?? Date: Tue, 23 Nov 2004 02:38:34 GMT Organization: EarthLink Inc. -- http://www.EarthLink.net I have Packet8 because I could not get a local Vonage number, and they are a bit less expensive. It is good enough for me, although not quite landline quality. It is probably slightly better than cellular, but there is noticeable delay and degradation when talking to a cell phone, probably due to the double compression. I made one international call to Germany, which didn't last long enough to get a good notion of the quality, but the return call seemed to sound better, so I wonder about the quality of the transatlantic link. Soon after you get it you probably want to upgrade the firmware in the interface box. It is painless, and there are fixes and features that were not in the firmware as shipped. That may no longer be the case, but it doesn't hurt to make sure. ------------------------------ From: nstrom@ananzi.co.za (Nathan Strom) Subject: Re: How Do I Learn an Unknown Number? Date: 23 Nov 2004 07:46:52 -0800 Organization: http://groups.google.com rekingus@yahoo.com (reking) wrote in message news:: > Anyone know how I can retrieve a phone number for a line that I have > recently discovered within our business. > SBC is our carrier but they tell me I would have to have someone come > out and trace the line at a charge. Is there a way of determining the > nimber by using some code entered on the phone. If there's a dialtone on the line, hook up a phone and try calling 1-888-902-9998. It should read back the number of the calling phone. [TELECOM Digest Editor's Note: I tried it just now and it worked fine on my Vonage line, and also on my cell phone line. PAT] ------------------------------ From: kludge@panix.com (Scott Dorsey) Subject: Re: Trial Shows How Spammers Operate Date: 23 Nov 2004 11:02:08 -0500 Organization: Former users of Netcom shell (1989-2000) In article , jdj wrote: > On Wed, 17 Nov 2004 03:12:34 -0500, Dan Lanciani wrote: >> My filters respond to every (seemingly) spam message with a note >> indicating how to bypass the filter if in fact the mail is not spam. >> (Actually they do this only once per sender per some months, but you >> get the idea.) I really can't just dump (seeming) spam in the bucket >> since there are a few false positives. But I get 1500+ spams per day >> and I can't look at them all. > Chances are that your filters are sending responses to forged > addresses. Occasionally I see messages like that and they are treated > like spam, since they have nothing to do with me and responding to > them is useless. They go to /dev/null. Until it's full. I am totally inundated these days with misidirected challenge/response messages and bounces from spammers that send out huge amounts of spam using my e-mail in the return address. It's got to the point where I just dump anything from mail-daemon or from postmaster addresses, and I just dump anything that looks like a C/R. When someone does a spam run with my return address, I will get ten to fifteen thousand bounces in a 24 hour period. This is very annoying. You _might_ do a lot better just to extract the first Received: line from the header and send a complaint to wherever that came from. For example, take the following procmail rule: # Comcast dynamic addresses :0 * ? /usr/local/bin/formail -xReceived: -uReceived: | grep client.comcast.net |cat $HOME/spam - | Mail -s "Your Spam" abuse@comcast.net We can basically be sure that if something comes from a dynamically allocated address on comcast, that it's spam from a zombie machine, so the false positive rate on this is basically zero. Real mail from comcast customers comes from the comcast mail server. Of course, Comcast doesn't care and they won't do anything about the complaints, but it will make you feel better to report the stuff anyway. And there are legitimate ISPs that do actually take care of problems, although these days they are increasingly in the minority. --scott "C'est un Nagra. C'est suisse, et tres, tres precis." ------------------------------ From: Gary Breuckman Subject: Re: Anyone Having any Luck With Google Ads? Date: Tue, 23 Nov 2004 11:05:24 -0600 Organization: Posted via Supernews, http://www.supernews.com Reply-To: puma@catbox.com Jeffrey Mattox wrote: > Pat: > [Please withhold my email address if you publish this.] > [TELECOM Digest Editor's Note: I have not had very good luck with them > to date. They seem to undercount hits to my various pages (based on my > examination of my logs) and some days they cannot come up with any > good ads at all. According to their figures, I am getting about 1.2 % > rate of impressions to clicks, but most people seem to get a lot > more. PAT] > I bet Google's hit count is more accurate regarding readership than > examining your logs. Although your logs are correct for pages served, > you cannot assume that every serve is to a human being. For example, > any spider or robot looking at your pages will appear as a hit in your > logs, but that robot will not trigger Google's hit counter because the > robot won't go to Google's site to fetch the ads. Depending on your web host, you can turn on something called 'referrer logs.' The referrer logs show WHERE the link to your page came from, and in the case of search engines often show the search keys that were used to find you. I often find it amusing to see what people used to find my pages. Knowing what keywords people actually used can help you put together the meta keyword and description tags in your pages, to make you even more findable. ie., if they put in 5 keywords and your tags only have two of them, maybe you should include the others for folks that only used THOSE. I also sometimes find other pages that have links to me that I didn't know about. -- Gary Breuckman ------------------------------ From: kludge@panix.com (Scott Dorsey) Subject: Re: EFF: Anti-Spam Measures Block Free Speech Date: 23 Nov 2004 13:23:14 -0500 Organization: Former users of Netcom shell (1989-2000) Barry Margolin wrote: > Where does it say that this is the reason why MoveOn.org's mail is > being blocked? One of the other problems that the white paper > mentioned is mailers that assume that any bulk email is spam -- but > legitimate mailing lists will necessarily send out bulk email. It doesn't. In fact, MoveOn.org's mail is blocked because they persist in sending huge amounts of mail out to people who never requested it. It's true that they are downstream of above.net, and it's true that a lot of folks do block above.net because they cater to so many spammers. So you can well imagine collateral damage resulting to legitimate customers of above.net. It's possible that it would have been the case if MoveOn.org was a legitimate customer, but they aren't. They are spammers, and therefore they get treated like spammers. The collateral damage issue is a serious one, but it's about the only way to get large ISPs to take the spam problem seriously. What is currently happening in Korea is a fine example of what happens when largescale blocking of spamming ISPs does not occur. > What bugs me is EFF's use of the phrase "free speech" to make this > sound like a 1st Amendment issue. The 1st Amendment only limits the > *government's* ability to curtail free speech. It doesn't require > organizations to facilitate any particular communications. And it certainly doesn't require ME to use MY resources to facilitate someone else's communications. --scott "C'est un Nagra. C'est suisse, et tres, tres precis." ------------------------------ Subject: Re: The Persuaders From: tom.horsley@att.net (Thomas A. Horsley) Organization: AT&T Worldnet Date: Mon, 22 Nov 2004 22:47:38 GMT The most fascinating aspect of TV advertising is to listen to TV executives telling their advertisers how effective TV ads are at influencing viewers one day, then see them in a Senate hearing the next day saying that violence on TV doesn't have any effect at all on viewers who are far too smart to confuse fiction and reality. I wish they would at least make up their minds about how influential TV really is :-). -- >>==>> The *Best* political site >>==+ email: Tom.Horsley@worldnet.att.net icbm: Delray Beach, FL | Free Software and Politics <<==+ ------------------------------ From: Patrick Townson Subject: Deja Vu All Over Again Date: Tue, 23 Nov 2004 11:56:04 -0600 A message from my cousin, Ken Bryant of interest. From: "Ken Bryant" Sent: Monday, November 22, 2004 11:21 PM Subject: Deja Vu all over again > Can you say Vietnam? Ah ... there ... I thought you could. > 40 years to the day since Lyndon Johnson in 1964. > More Troops May Be Needed in Iraq > Monday, November 22, 2004 > Senior military commanders told FOX News that they are considering a > slight increase in combat power in Iraq prior to that country's > elections at the end of January. > The Washington Post, citing unnamed military commanders, reported on > Monday that the top brass is considering increasing the total number of > combat forces to go after terrorists that fled Fallujah after the U.S. > and Iraqi-led offensive there. > U.S. and Iraqi troops continue to clear the last of the resistance from > Fallujah, the main rebel bastion that was stormed Nov. 8 in hopes of > breaking the back of the insurgency before the Jan. 30 election. > American commanders said U.S. and Iraqi forces killed more than 1,000 > enemy fighters during the eight-day battle there and found torture > chambers and the suspected headquarters of Al Qaeda-linked terrorist Abu > Musab al-Zarqawi. > The Pentagon last month ordered about 6,500 soldiers in Iraq to extend > their tours by up to two months. Military officers told the Post that > the exact number of extra troops needed is still being reviewed but > estimated it at the equivalent of several battalions, or about 3,000 to > 5,000 soldiers. The number of U.S. troops in Iraq fell to nearly 100,000 > last spring before rising to 138,000, where it has stayed since the > summer. > Senior commanders told FOX News that the increase being considered in > Iraq will be much like the increase seen in Afghanistan prior to those > elections, but on a bigger scale. > The troop movement in Iraq has always been a possibility, and now with > the success in stomping out much of the insurgency in Fallujah, one > senior commander said: "We have to keep the pressure on." > Lt. Gen. Lance Smith, deputy commander of U.S. Central Command, said > Friday that military leaders will further assess the situation as time > goes on and will look at the impact of the Fallujah operation on the > entire country. Currently, the United States has 18 brigades in Iraq. > "We will expect, by using extensions of some troops that were only > planning on being over there for 10 months, extending them another two > months so that they still would be on the ground, you know, about a > year, and using that to add additional forces over there," Smith said. > "The issue, by the way, is not just numbers. The issue is really about > experienced troops during this period of time of expected increased > violence." > Smith postulated that about an additional brigade's worth of forces may > be needed but that number hasn't yet been finalized. It's not the > military's intent to keep troops in Iraq beyond a year, Smith said. A > brigade is usually 2,500 to 3,500 troops. > "If we believe the security situation requires that, we will make the > appropriate recommendation to the secretary and through our leadership > channels," he added. > Troop numbers could reach about 141,000 to 145,000, Smith said. > The military also hasn't ruled out using the U.S. strategic reserve > forces, he said. > "But again, I think too early to try and decide that until we really see > what's happening with the - after - in the aftermath of Fallujah." ------------------------------ From: Lisa Minter Subject: Last Laugh! Online Casino Buys Virgin Mary Sandwich for $28,000 Date: Tue, 23 Nov 2004 12:06:58 EST MIAMI (Reuters) - An online casino won the eBay bidding for a decade-old cheese sandwich bearing what some people consider a likeness of the Virgin Mary and immediately began hawking Virgin Mary Grilled Cheese T-shirts. GoldenPalace.com's bid of $28,000 was the highest offer for the sandwich when bidding closed late on Monday, the Internet casino's Web site said. The seller, Fort Lauderdale, Florida resident Diana Duyser, says she made the cheese sandwich 10 years ago and after taking a bite, saw "the Virgin Mary staring back at me." In her eBay ad, Duyser said the sandwich has been kept in a plastic case for a decade and has developed no mold or bacteria. "It is like a miracle," she said. "I would like all people to know that I do believe that this is the Virgin Mary, Mother Of God," the ad said. "That is my solemn belief, but you are free to believe that she is whomever you like, I am not scamming anyone." GoldenPalace.com said on its Web site that the "sacred sandwich" had received more than 1.7 million hits since being posted on eBay. The company's chief executive, Richard Rowe, said the sandwich would be used to raise money for charity. The T-shirts, in various styles bearing a picture of the sandwich and a GoldenPalace.com logo, sell for $19.99. "We believe that everyone should be able to see it and learn of its mystical power for themselves," Rowe said. *** FAIR USE NOTICE. This message contains copyrighted material the use of which has not been specifically authorized by the copyright owner. This Internet discussion group is making it available without profit to group members who have expressed a prior interest in receiving the included information in their efforts to advance the understanding of literary, educational, political, and economic issues, for non-profit research and educational purposes only. I believe that this constitutes a 'fair use' of the copyrighted material as provided for in section 107 of the U.S. Copyright Law. If you wish to use this copyrighted material for purposes of your own that go beyond 'fair use,' you must obtain permission from the copyright owner. in this instance Reuters News Service. For more information go to: http://www.law.cornell.edu/uscode/17/107.shtml ------------------------------ From: Patrick Townson Subject: Last Laugh! Ordering Pizza by Phone in 2008 Date: Tue, 23 Nov 2004 11:52:35 -0600 This is so close to what is probably going to be happening in 2008 that I'm not sure how funny this really is or if it should be a last laugh. ORDERING PIZZA BY PHONE IN 2008 - Operator: Thank you for calling Pizza Hut. May I have your national ID number? Customer: Hi, I'd like to place an order. Operator: I must have your NIDN first, sir. Customer: My National ID Number, yeah, hold on, eh, it's 6102049998-45-54610. Operator: Thank you Mr. Smith. I see you live at 1742 Meadowland Drive, and the phone number is 494-2366. Your office number over at Lincoln Insurance is 745-2302 and your cell number is 266-2566. Email address is smith@home.net Which number are you calling from? Customer: Huh? I'm at home. Where'd you get all this information? Operator: We're wired into the HSS, sir. Customer: The HSS, what is that? Operator: We're wired into the Homeland Security System, sir. This will add only 15 seconds to your ordering time. Customer: (sighs) Oh well, I'd like to order a couple of your All Meat Special pizzas. Operator: I don't think that's a good idea, sir. Customer: Whaddya mean? Operator: Sir, your medical records and commode sensors indicate that you've got very high blood pressure and extremely high cholesterol. Your National Health Care provider won't allow such an unhealthy choice . Customer: What?!?! What do you recommend, then? Operator: You might try our low-fat Soybean Pizza.I'm sure you'll like it. Customer: What makes you think I'd like something like that? Operator: Well, you checked out 'Gourmet Soybean Recipes' from your local library last week, sir. That's why I made the suggestion. Customer: All right, all right. Give me two family-sized ones, then Operator: That should be plenty for you, your wife and your four kids. Your 2 dogs can finish the crusts, sir. Your total is $49.99. Customer: Lemme give you my credit card number. Operator: I'm sorry sir, but I'm afraid you'll have to pay in cash. Your credit card balance is over its limit. Customer: I'll run over to the ATM and get some cash before your driver gets here. Operator: That won't work either, sir. Your checking account is overdrawn also. Customer: Never mind! Just send the pizzas. I'll have the cash ready. How long will it take? Operator: We're running a little behind, sir. It'll be about 45 minutes, sir. If you're in a hurry you might want to pick'em while you're out getting the cash, but then, carrying pizzas on a motorcycle can be a little awkward. Customer: Wait! How do you know I ride a scooter? Operator: It says here you're in arrears on your car payments, so your car got repo'ed. But your Harley's paid for and you just filled the tank yesterday. Customer: Well, I'll be a #%#^^&$%^$@# Operator: I'd advise watching your language, sir. You've already got a July 4, 2003, conviction for cussing out a cop and another one I see here in September for contempt at your hearing for cussing at a judge Oh yes, I see here that you just got out from a 90 day stay in the State Correctional Facility. Is this your first pizza since your return to society? Customer: (speechless) Operator: Will there be anything else, sir? Customer: Yes, I have a coupon for a free 2 liter of Coke. Operator: I'm sorry sir, but our ad's exclusionary clause prevents us from offering free soda to diabetics. The New Constitution our country started using in 2006 prohibits this. Thank you for calling Pizza Hut. ------------------------------ TELECOM Digest is an electronic journal devoted mostly but not exclusively to telecommunications topics. It is circulated anywhere there is email, in addition to various telecom forums on a variety of networks such as Compuserve and America On Line, Yahoo Groups, and other forums. It is also gatewayed to Usenet where it appears as the moderated newsgroup 'comp.dcom.telecom'. TELECOM Digest is a not-for-profit, mostly non-commercial educational service offered to the Internet by Patrick Townson. All the contents of the Digest are compilation-copyrighted. You may reprint articles in some other media on an occasional basis, but please attribute my work and that of the original author. Contact information: Patrick Townson/TELECOM Digest Post Office Box 50 Independence, KS 67301 Phone: 620-402-0134 Fax 1: 775-255-9970 Fax 2: 530-309-7234 Fax 3: 208-692-5145 Email: editor@telecom-digest.org Subscribe: telecom-subscribe@telecom-digest.org Unsubscribe:telecom-unsubscribe@telecom-digest.org This Digest is the oldest continuing e-journal about telecomm- unications on the Internet, having been founded in August, 1981 and published continuously since then. Our archives are available for your review/research. We believe we are the oldest e-zine/mailing list on the internet in any category! URL information: http://telecom-digest.org Anonymous FTP: mirror.lcs.mit.edu/telecom-archives/archives/ (or use our mirror site: ftp.epix.net/pub/telecom-archives) Email <==> FTP: telecom-archives@telecom-digest.org Send a simple, one line note to that automated address for a help file on how to use the automatic retrieval system for archives files. You can get desired files in email. ************************************************************************* * TELECOM Digest is partially funded by a grant from * * Judith Oppenheimer, President of ICB Inc. and purveyor of accurate * * 800 & Dot Com News, Intelligence, Analysis, and Consulting. * * http://ICBTollFree.com, http://1800TheExpert.com * * Views expressed herein should not be construed as representing * * views of Judith Oppenheimer or ICB Inc. * ************************************************************************* ICB Toll Free News. Contact information is not sold, rented or leased. One click a day feeds a person a meal. Go to http://www.thehungersite.com Copyright 2004 ICB, Inc. and TELECOM Digest. All rights reserved. Our attorney is Bill Levant, of Blue Bell, PA. ************************ DIRECTORY ASSISTANCE JUST 65 CENTS ONE OR TWO INQUIRIES CHARGED TO YOUR CREDIT CARD! REAL TIME, UP TO DATE! SPONSORED BY TELECOM DIGEST AND EASY411.COM SIGN UP AT http://www.easy411.com/telecomdigest ! ************************ --------------------------------------------------------------- Finally, the Digest is funded by gifts from generous readers such as yourself who provide funding in amounts deemed appropriate. Your help is important and appreciated. A suggested donation of fifty dollars per year per reader is considered appropriate. See our address above. Please make at least a single donation to cover the cost of processing your name to the mailing list. All opinions expressed herein are deemed to be those of the author. Any organizations listed are for identification purposes only and messages should not be considered any official expression by the organization. End of TELECOM Digest V23 #563 ****************************** From editor@telecom-digest.org Tue Nov 23 20:16:32 2004 Received: (from ptownson@localhost) by massis.lcs.mit.edu (8.11.6p3/8.11.6) id iAO1GWQ18608; Tue, 23 Nov 2004 20:16:32 -0500 (EST) Date: Tue, 23 Nov 2004 20:16:32 -0500 (EST) From: editor@telecom-digest.org Message-Id: <200411240116.iAO1GWQ18608@massis.lcs.mit.edu> X-Authentication-Warning: massis.lcs.mit.edu: ptownson set sender to editor@telecom-digest.org using -f To: ptownson Approved: patsnewlist Subject: TELECOM Digest V23 #564 TELECOM Digest Tue, 23 Nov 2004 20:16:00 EST Volume 23 : Issue 564 Inside This Issue: Editor: Patrick A. Townson Telecom Update (Canada) #458, November 22, 2004 (Angus TeleManagement) Virgin Mobile USA May Seek IPO (Telecom dailyLead from USTA) Verizon Fios and Its Effect on v.90 Modems? (Charles W Green Jr) Re: Anyone Having any Luck With Google Ads? (DevilsPGD) Re: What Wal-Mart Knows About Customers' Habits (DevilsPGD) All contents here are copyrighted by Patrick Townson and the individual writers/correspondents. Articles may be used in other journals or newsgroups, provided the writer's name and the Digest are included in the fair use quote. By using -any name or email address- included herein for -any- reason other than responding to an article herein, you agree to pay a hundred dollars to the recipients of the email. =========================== Addresses herein are not to be added to any mailing list, nor to be sold or given away without explicit written consent. Chain letters, viruses, porn, spam, and miscellaneous junk are definitely unwelcome. We must fight spam for the same reason we fight crime: not because we are naive enough to believe that we will ever stamp it out, but because we do not want the kind of world that results when no one stands against crime. Geoffrey Welsh =========================== See the bottom of this issue for subscription and archive details and the name of our lawyer; other stuff of interest. ---------------------------------------------------------------------- Date: Tue, 23 Nov 2004 16:51:42 -0500 From: Angus TeleManagement Subject: Telecom Update (Canada) #458, November 22, 2004 ************************************************************ TELECOM UPDATE ************************************************************ published weekly by Angus TeleManagement Group http://www.angustel.ca Number 458: November 22, 2004 Publication of Telecom Update is made possible by generous financial support from: ** ALLSTREAM: www.allstream.com ** AVAYA: www.avaya.ca/en/ ** BELL CANADA: www.bell.ca ** CISCO SYSTEMS CANADA: www.cisco.com/ca/ ** ERICSSON: www.ericsson.ca ** MITEL NETWORKS: www.mitel.com/ ** SPRINT CANADA: www.sprint.ca ** UTC CANADA: www.canada.utc.org/ ************************************************************ IN THIS ISSUE: ** Bell and Call-Net Complete 360 Deal ** City Fido Launched in Montreal ** Telus to Buy Video Conferencing Firm ** Bell Files Centrex III Rate Increases ** ExpressVu Wins Inside Wire Dispute ** Rogers Offers Consumer-Focused BlackBerry ** Change in Satellite Use Policy Proposed ** CRTC Okays Bell TV Application ** Survey Reports Local Competition Growth ** International VoIP Traffic Growth Slows ** Rogers Removes 4-1-1 Fee for Visually Impaired ** Total Telcom Forms Last-Mile Venture ** IWAY Awards Announced ** Chris Tacit to Join Cybersurf ** Opening Up Wi-Fi to Guests and Customers ============================================================ BELL AND CALL-NET COMPLETE 360 DEAL: Bell Canada has completed its acquisition of the Canadian operations of 360networks and Group Telecom, for C$275 million. As part of the transaction, Call-Net Enterprises purchased 360's retail customer contracts in central and eastern Canada from Bell for about $15 million, to be paid over two years. (See Telecom Update #435) ** Call-Net is also paying $2.3 million for an option to acquire 360's local network facilities, including access to over 1,000 buildings. ** Bell will retain the Group Telecom brand name in western Canada; the business will be headed by Bell's Mark Hanlon, who has been appointed COO. CITY FIDO LAUNCHED IN MONTREAL: Microcell's new Rogers-appointed management has launched City Fido in greater Montreal, providing unlimited local wireless calls for $45/month. ** Rogers plans to apply a $6.95/month "system access fee" on new City Fido accounts, and to increase out-of-region roaming charges from 20 to 30 cents/minute. TELUS TO BUY VIDEO CONFERENCING FIRM: Telus has agreed to acquire Toronto-based Adcom, video conferencing company with 84 employees and 2004 sales of $24.7 million. BELL FILES CENTREX III RATE INCREASES: In Tariff Notice 6839, Bell Canada proposes to increase rates for Centrex Microlink Access and Data Locals in January, and to eliminate multi- year term discounts as current contracts expire. The changes are intended "to encourage customers to migrate towards new [IP-based] services." www.crtc.gc.ca/8740/eng/2004/B2.htm#200412560 EXPRESSVU WINS INSIDE WIRE DISPUTE: In response to a complaint by ExpressVu, the CRTC has ruled that Rogers Cable must allow competitors to lease its inside wire in apartment buildings for 52 cents/subscriber/month, instead of requiring building owners to buy back the inside wire if a competitor begins offering service in the building. ** Two commissioners dissented. Barbara Cram says that the 52 cent fee may be too low for use of wire in new buildings. Stuart Langford says the Commission should not interfere in building owners' contracts. www.crtc.gc.ca/archive/ENG/Decisions/2004/db2004-494.htm ROGERS OFFERS CONSUMER-FOCUSED BLACKBERRY: Rogers Wireless has begun selling the BlackBerry 7100r, which provides e- mail, voice, web, and organizer functions in a phone-like design. Price: $399 with a three-year contract. CHANGE IN SATELLITE USE POLICY PROPOSED: Industry Canada requests comment by November 29 on a proposal to allow satellite radio services to broadcast Canadian programs in Canada using U.S. satellites. http://strategis.ic.gc.ca/epic/internet/insmt-gst.nsf/en/sf08253e.html CRTC OKAYS BELL TV APPLICATION: The CRTC has approved Bell Canada's application to distribute television programming using DSL in Ontario (Toronto, Hamilton/Niagara, Oshawa, Kitchener, London, Windsor, and Ottawa) and Quebec (Montreal, Gatineau, Sherbrooke, and Quebec City). Bell has two years to launch the service. www.crtc.gc.ca/archive/ENG/Decisions/2004/db2004-496.htm SURVEY REPORTS LOCAL COMPETITION GROWTH: The 2004 edition of NBI/Michael Sone Associates' report on Canadian Local Telecom Services, just released, says that: ** Competitors now have more than 20% of the business lines in London, Toronto, Hamilton, Kitchener, Windsor, and Quebec City. ** Competitors have 5%-7% of the residential lines in London, Toronto, Hamilton, Kitchener, Montreal, Vancouver, Calgary, and Oshawa, and nearly 30% in Halifax. www.nbicanada.com/reports.html INTERNATIONAL VoIP TRAFFIC GROWTH SLOWS: TeleGeography reports that the yearly growth rate of international Voice over IP traffic was 23% in 2003 and will be about 40% in 2004, a decline from the 80% annual growth rate of previous years. VoIP now accounts for 11% of international calls. www.telegeography.com ROGERS REMOVES 4-1-1 FEE FOR VISUALLY IMPAIRED: Rogers Wireless has made directory assistance service available without charge to customers who are blind or visually impaired. The service normally costs $1.25/call. TOTAL TELCOM FORMS LAST-MILE VENTURE: Total Telcom, an Alberta-based fibre provider, has joined with Winnipeg-based WiBand Communications to form QC-Networks, which will provide fibre and wireless-based last-mile connectivity across Alberta. ** Total Telcom had sales for the year ended June 30 of $12.9 million, compared to $3.6 million the previous year. Net income rose 51% to $1.7 million. IWAY AWARDS ANNOUNCED: CANARIE's Ninth Annual IWAY Awards will be presented at a gala celebration in Halifax tonight. This year's winners are: ** Adaptive Technology: Pierre Dumouchel, CRIM ** Application of Technology: Adam Froman, Delvinia Interactive ** Community Service: Karen Keppler, Smart Partners of Manitoba ** New Technology Development: Andre Charbonneau & Gabriel Mateescu, National Research Council ** Public Leadership: Brian Unger, iCore CHRIS TACIT TO JOIN CYBERSURF: Well-known regulatory lawyer Chris Tacit is leaving Nelligan O'Brien Payne. He will join ISP Cybersurf Corp. as Vice-President Law and General Counsel in January. OPENING UP WI-FI TO GUESTS AND CUSTOMERS: The November-December issue of Telemanagement analyzes initiatives by Canadian organizations to make their Wi-Fi networks available to non-employees with no loss of security. Also in this issue: ** Reinventing Telecom Management-Again ** Avaya and Mitel: Two Strategies for IP Success ** IP Shakes Up Health Care Network These reports are available to Telemanagement subscribers only. To subscribe today, call 1-800-263-4415 ext 500 or go to www.angustel.ca/teleman/tm-sub-online.html. ============================================================ HOW TO SUBMIT ITEMS FOR TELECOM UPDATE E-MAIL: editors@angustel.ca FAX: 905-686-2655 MAIL: TELECOM UPDATE Angus TeleManagement Group 8 Old Kingston Road Ajax, Ontario Canada L1T 2Z7 =========================================================== HOW TO SUBSCRIBE (OR UNSUBSCRIBE) TELECOM UPDATE is provided in electronic form only. There are two formats available: 1. The fully-formatted edition is posted on the World Wide Web on the first business day of the week at www.angustel.ca 2. The e-mail edition is distributed free of charge. To subscribe, send an e-mail message to: join-telecom_update@nova.sparklist.com To stop receiving the e-mail edition, send an e-mail message to: leave-telecom_update@nova.sparklist.com Sending e-mail to these addresses will automatically add or remove the sender's e-mail address from the list. Leave subject line and message area blank. We do not give Telecom Update subscribers' e-mail addresses to any third party. For more information, see www.angustel.ca/update/privacy.html. =========================================================== COPYRIGHT AND CONDITIONS OF USE: All contents copyright 2004 Angus TeleManagement Group Inc. All rights reserved. For further information, including permission to reprint or reproduce, please e-mail rosita@angustel.ca or phone 905-686-5050 ext 500. The information and data included has been obtained from sources which we believe to be reliable, but Angus TeleManagement makes no warranties or representations whatsoever regarding accuracy, completeness, or adequacy. Opinions expressed are based on interpretation of available information, and are subject to change. If expert advice on the subject matter is required, the services of a competent professional should be obtained. ------------------------------ Date: Tue, 23 Nov 2004 12:52:55 EST From: Telecom DailyLead From USTA Subject: Virgin Mobile USA May Seek IPO http://www.dailylead.com/latestIssue.jsp?i=17700&l=2017006 TODAY'S HEADLINES NEWS OF THE DAY * Virgin Mobile USA may seek IPO BUSINESS & INDUSTRY WATCH * Report: Carrier VoIP revenues soar * SBC's Whitacre talks video * Internet changing telcos' Yellow Pages business USTA SPOTLIGHT * Telecom Basics, 3rd Edition, is Now Available EMERGING TECHNOLOGIES * Special Report: The state of television technology REGULATORY & LEGISLATIVE * Adelstein wins Senate confirmation * Citywide Wi-Fi faces opposition http://www.dailylead.com/latestIssue.jsp?i=17700&l=2017006 ------------------------------ From: CharlesWGreenJr@NetScape.Net Subject: Verizon Fios and its Effect on v.90 Modems? Date: 23 Nov 2004 11:30:11 -0800 Organization: http://groups.google.com It looks like we'll soon be getting Verizon's fiber-to-the-premises on our street, so I can give up my Adelphia cable modem. In reading about other people's experiences, however, a thought has occurred to me: It is sometimes necessary for me to dial up via modem when my home broadband connection doesn't work, or there are VPN issues between my laptop and the workplace. It's my understanding that when people opt to have the fiber broadband brought to their house, it *replaces* the existing copper pairs which are currently serving my analog phone - a box is mounted outside the house, the fiber goes in, and broadband and phone connections come out and go into the house. (Somewhere in there, power and backup battery from the homeowner come into play as well.) I understand that v.90 gets its high-speed inbound capability when there is a pure digital path from the remote / server "modem" end all the way to a single D/A converter which serves the analog feed to the house. The shorter and cleaner the analog end, the better the modem does. And if there's another A/D - D/A stage in between, the v.90 "magic" is lost. Does anyone know whether FTTP, at least for Verizon, means that the phone connection can now be pure digital all the way to my house, or is some sort of conversion performed on the signal before it gets to the neighborhood which might wreak havoc with v.90? Thanks, Charles Green ------------------------------ From: DevilsPGD Subject: Re: Anyone Having any Luck With Google Ads? Date: Tue, 23 Nov 2004 16:36:29 -0700 Organization: Posted via Supernews, http://www.supernews.com In message Michael A. Covington wrote: > [TELECOM Digest Editor's Note: I have not had very good luck with them > to date. They seem to undercount hits to my various pages (based on my > examination of my logs) and some days they cannot come up with any > good ads at all. According to their figures, I am getting about 1.2 % > rate of impressions to clicks, but most people seem to get a lot > more. PAT] As I understand it, Google ads require JavaScript to load. Every user that hits your site without JavaScript, or with some adblocking technology in place will count as a hit as far as you're concerned, but not as far as Google is concerned. A fool and his money are soon popular. [TELECOM Digest Editor's Note: This is true. Google does use JavaScript. But Google would have no way of knowing what the user did or did not have on his computer until it was time for the javascript to be executed, and by then the hit would already have been counted, wouldn't it? PAT] ------------------------------ From: DevilsPGD Subject: Re: What Wal-Mart Knows About Customers' Habits Date: Tue, 23 Nov 2004 16:36:28 -0700 Organization: Posted via Supernews, http://www.supernews.com In message bonomi@host122.r-bonomi.com (Robert Bonomi) wrote: > There are *very* limited ways for a cashier to themselves steal cash > money 'from the store', and approximately _one_ way to steal from the > customers, with 'computerized' registers. > Doing multiple charges against a card is simply *not* one of them. > The audit trail catches it at the end-of-shift, or over-night, at > worst. And the records point directly to the perp. Sure. However, since the customer can request cash back it's another way to steal. The cashier fakes problems scanning an item, punches in the amount manually as cash, and gives the customer the item. The customer isn't over charged, so has no reason to complain. The cashier's till is now over -- Now she just needs to grab the cash at some point during the transaction. > If the card never leaves your hand, they are correct. it could *not* > happened via multiple swipes. *Unless* _you_ did it, in which case > it =is= valid multiple charges. :) With a credit card, you just call the company and reverse the charges -- Unless Walmart can show multiple signatures you get your money back. With debit you can let the rep swipe the card as many times as you want, as long as you only enter your PIN once. After entering your PIN, unless the store can produce a receipt which shows you were not charged, you should assume you were billed. > [TELECOM Digest Editor's Note: You are generally correct as far as the > plastic never leaving my hands. At the bank of cash registers, there > is an LED screen facing the cashier and a side facing the > customer. The side facing me had a place to slide your card, and a > keypad to enter your PIN as needed. The cashier slides your item > across a glass thing which examines it and reads the bar code, the the > register makes a 'ping' noise and the display screen says what the > item was and how much it costs. If the register does not make its > 'ping noise' they slide it over the glass again until the register > *does* ping. If it never will ping (I have seen that happen, then the > cashier manually enters the price on the keypad on that side, But they > work so rapidly I cannot keep up with them. With a debit card if you > want cash back, you tell the cashier and that amount is added to the > total you paid, and it is treated like amount due, total tendered > (sale plus cash back) and change due (amount of the cash back). Bob > Donaldson told me once that each cashier has to check their money box > out of the office when they start their shift. To prevent the fraud I described above, Walmarts around here cannot give you cash back from a debit card unless the customer requests it using the keypad. A fool and his money are soon popular. ------------------------------ TELECOM Digest is an electronic journal devoted mostly but not exclusively to telecommunications topics. It is circulated anywhere there is email, in addition to various telecom forums on a variety of networks such as Compuserve and America On Line, Yahoo Groups, and other forums. It is also gatewayed to Usenet where it appears as the moderated newsgroup 'comp.dcom.telecom'. TELECOM Digest is a not-for-profit, mostly non-commercial educational service offered to the Internet by Patrick Townson. All the contents of the Digest are compilation-copyrighted. You may reprint articles in some other media on an occasional basis, but please attribute my work and that of the original author. Contact information: Patrick Townson/TELECOM Digest Post Office Box 50 Independence, KS 67301 Phone: 620-402-0134 Fax 1: 775-255-9970 Fax 2: 530-309-7234 Fax 3: 208-692-5145 Email: editor@telecom-digest.org Subscribe: telecom-subscribe@telecom-digest.org Unsubscribe:telecom-unsubscribe@telecom-digest.org This Digest is the oldest continuing e-journal about telecomm- unications on the Internet, having been founded in August, 1981 and published continuously since then. Our archives are available for your review/research. We believe we are the oldest e-zine/mailing list on the internet in any category! URL information: http://telecom-digest.org Anonymous FTP: mirror.lcs.mit.edu/telecom-archives/archives/ (or use our mirror site: ftp.epix.net/pub/telecom-archives) Email <==> FTP: telecom-archives@telecom-digest.org Send a simple, one line note to that automated address for a help file on how to use the automatic retrieval system for archives files. You can get desired files in email. ************************************************************************* * TELECOM Digest is partially funded by a grant from * * Judith Oppenheimer, President of ICB Inc. and purveyor of accurate * * 800 & Dot Com News, Intelligence, Analysis, and Consulting. * * http://ICBTollFree.com, http://1800TheExpert.com * * Views expressed herein should not be construed as representing * * views of Judith Oppenheimer or ICB Inc. * ************************************************************************* ICB Toll Free News. Contact information is not sold, rented or leased. One click a day feeds a person a meal. Go to http://www.thehungersite.com Copyright 2004 ICB, Inc. and TELECOM Digest. All rights reserved. Our attorney is Bill Levant, of Blue Bell, PA. ************************ DIRECTORY ASSISTANCE JUST 65 CENTS ONE OR TWO INQUIRIES CHARGED TO YOUR CREDIT CARD! REAL TIME, UP TO DATE! SPONSORED BY TELECOM DIGEST AND EASY411.COM SIGN UP AT http://www.easy411.com/telecomdigest ! ************************ --------------------------------------------------------------- Finally, the Digest is funded by gifts from generous readers such as yourself who provide funding in amounts deemed appropriate. Your help is important and appreciated. A suggested donation of fifty dollars per year per reader is considered appropriate. See our address above. Please make at least a single donation to cover the cost of processing your name to the mailing list. All opinions expressed herein are deemed to be those of the author. Any organizations listed are for identification purposes only and messages should not be considered any official expression by the organization. End of TELECOM Digest V23 #564 ****************************** From editor@telecom-digest.org Wed Nov 24 14:29:12 2004 Received: (from ptownson@localhost) by massis.lcs.mit.edu (8.11.6p3/8.11.6) id iAOJTAR27691; Wed, 24 Nov 2004 14:29:12 -0500 (EST) Date: Wed, 24 Nov 2004 14:29:12 -0500 (EST) From: editor@telecom-digest.org Message-Id: <200411241929.iAOJTAR27691@massis.lcs.mit.edu> X-Authentication-Warning: massis.lcs.mit.edu: ptownson set sender to editor@telecom-digest.org using -f To: ptownson Approved: patsnewlist Subject: TELECOM Digest V23 #565 TELECOM Digest Wed, 24 Nov 2004 14:29:00 EST Volume 23 : Issue 565 Inside This Issue: Happy Thanksgiving to All! FCC: 8M Wireless Users Keep Cell Numbers (Monty Solomon) Lobbyists Try to Kill Philly Wireless Plan (Monty Solomon) EFFector 17.42: Call for Independent Testing of E-voting (Monty Solomon) A-la-carte Pricing For Cable and Satellite TV (Neal McLain) How to Pronounce "Skype" (Noam Avnery) Draytek VoIP DSL Router, Vigor2500V Model (Chris Tsai) Vetting SBC's VOIP (Lisa Minter) Re: What Wal-Mart Knows About Customers' Habits (Robert Bonomi) Re: What Wal-Mart Knows About Customers' Habits (Tony P.) Re: Anyone Having any Luck With Google Ads? (Robert Bonomi) Re: How Do I Learn an Unknown Number? (jtaylor) Re: Dropping SBC For a VoIP Solution - Vonage or Packet8? (Ringo Langly) Broadband Use Doubled Between 2001-2003 (Daily Lead from USTA) Fax Machine Transmission Test (Forrest Nelson) Re: Trial Shows How Spammers Operate (Scott Dorsey) All contents here are copyrighted by Patrick Townson and the individual writers/correspondents. Articles may be used in other journals or newsgroups, provided the writer's name and the Digest are included in the fair use quote. By using -any name or email address- included herein for -any- reason other than responding to an article herein, you agree to pay a hundred dollars to the recipients of the email. =========================== Addresses herein are not to be added to any mailing list, nor to be sold or given away without explicit written consent. Chain letters, viruses, porn, spam, and miscellaneous junk are definitely unwelcome. We must fight spam for the same reason we fight crime: not because we are naive enough to believe that we will ever stamp it out, but because we do not want the kind of world that results when no one stands against crime. Geoffrey Welsh =========================== See the bottom of this issue for subscription and archive details and the name of our lawyer; other stuff of interest. ---------------------------------------------------------------------- Date: Tue, 23 Nov 2004 20:42:16 -0500 From: Monty Solomon Subject: FCC: 8M Wireless Users Keep Cell Numbers By BRUCE MEYERSON AP Business Writer NEW YORK (AP) -- Nearly 8 million mobile phone users have switched carriers and kept their cell numbers since a new rule allowing that flexibility went into effect one year ago, the Federal Communications Commission disclosed Tuesday. Almost 750,000 more people have moved either a home or office phone number to a cell phone, the FCC told The Associated Press on the eve of the one-year anniversary of the agency's "number portability" order. The agency planned to report on Wednesday that by the end of October, 8.5 million people had taken advantage of the rule which took effect in the nation's 100 biggest markets on Nov. 24, 2003. That includes 7.8 million who switched from one cell phone company to another. The FCC also revealed that the pace picked up significantly when the rules were extended nationally to include smaller and rural markets in late spring, jumping from roughly 700,000 customer switches in March, April and May to more than 1 million in June and 950,000 in July. The figures suggest that millions of cell phone users may have been frustrated with their cell phone service but were hesitant to switch providers because they didn't want to give up a phone number which was familiar to friends, business associates and family. However, the tally is well short of many forecasts issued a year ago, some of which predicted that up to 30 million people might switch carriers in the first year. - http://finance.lycos.com/home/news/story.asp?story=45219863 ------------------------------ Date: Tue, 23 Nov 2004 20:44:33 -0500 From: Monty Solomon Subject: Lobbyists Try to Kill Philly Wireless Plan By MARC LEVY Associated Press Writer HARRISBURG, Pa. (AP) -- Philadelphia's plan to offer inexpensive wireless Internet as a municipal service _ the most ambitious yet by major U.S. city _ has collided with commercial interests including the local phone company, Verizon Communications Inc. In fact, a bill on Gov. Ed Rendell's desk that could humble Philadelphia's ambitions began 19 months ago as a proposal drafted by lobbyists for telecommunications companies. Regional and long-distance phone companies, who sell broadband Internet to consumers and businesses, have in recent months intensified a national campaign to quash municipal wireless initiatives like Philadelphia's as dozens of cities and towns have either begun or announced such plans _ from San Francisco to Chaska, Minn., to St. Cloud, Fla. Telecommunications companies are doubly worried because hundreds of other municipalities provide broadband service over cable or telephone lines. The idea of cheap, municipally provided Internet as social leveler is particularly appealing to big city politicians. - http://finance.lycos.com/home/news/story.asp?story=45214162 ------------------------------ Date: Tue, 23 Nov 2004 21:48:07 -0500 From: Monty Solomon Subject: EFFector 17.42: Call for Independent Testing of E-voting EFFector Vol. 17, No. 42 November 19, 2004 donna@eff.org A Publication of the Electronic Frontier Foundation ISSN 1062-9424 In the 313th Issue of EFFector: * Action Alert: Call for Independent Testing of E-voting Machines! * EFF Fights for Justice at WIPO * Public Interest Groups Support ISP in Protecting User Privacy * EFF Continues Push for Access to Secret Court Order in Indymedia Seizure * EFF Urges FCC Not to Mandate Surveillance Regime on the Internet * Anti-spam Measures Block Free Speech * Nitke v. Ashcroft Trial Highlights Difficulty of Applying "Community Standards" to Online Speech * EFF Seeks Detail-Oriented, Can-do Intake Coordinator * MiniLinks (11): "Music Is Not a Loaf of Bread" * Staff Calendar: 12.02.04 - Fred von Lohmann speaks at CATO City Seminar on "Liberty, Technology, and Prosperity," Palo Alto, CA * Administrivia http://www.eff.org/effector/17/42.php ------------------------------ Date: Tue, 23 Nov 2004 22:00:39 -0600 From: Neal McLain Subject: A-la-carte Pricing For Cable and Satellite TV The FCC has released its report on a-la-carte pricing for cable TV and satellite TV services (formally called "Report on the Packaging and Sale of Video Programming Services To the Public"). It's posted on the FCC website at http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DOC-254432A1.pdf . It's a huge document (129 pdf pages), but it's interesting to read. Neal McLain ------------------------------ From: dnoam@il.ibm.com (Noam Avnery) Subject: How to Pronounce "Skype" Date: 23 Nov 2004 23:37:20 -0800 Organization: http://groups.google.com Hi, Is it like "Hype" or like "Sky-pee"? TIA ------------------------------ From: cisco8899@yahoo.com.sg (Chris Tsai) Subject: Draytek VoIP DSL Router, Vigor2500V Model Date: 24 Nov 2004 00:59:41 -0800 Organization: http://groups.google.com The DrayTek (Taiwan) Vigor 2500V is an ADSL firewall/router - ideal for sharing yourADSL connection between several PCs, with a built-in VoIP (Voice over IP) telephone port. The phone port enables you to use your existing ADSL broadband connection to make VoIP calls to any other compatible device, anywhere in the world and anywhere on the Internet, free of charge. You can receive calls too of course, and all with a standard (analogue) telephone which you connect into the socket on the back of the router. By using the DrayTEL PSTN gateway (see later) you can also make calls to any regular phone line too, including mobiles, as well as receive calls from anyone - the call is carried to your phone via your internet connection so your regular phone line remains free for other people/calls. Having the Vigor2500V on your ADSL line effectively gives you an extra phoneline -- with no extra line rental, so when family or co-workers are tying upthe main line you can still make calls using the phone on your Vigor2500V - ideal for teleworkers who need that extra flexibility. The Vigor2500V is visually pleasing too; its curved lines and brushed silver finish enable itto fit into any environement stylishly. Pls read at www.draytek.co.uk www.draytek.com ------------------------------ From: Lisa Minter Date: Tue, 23 Nov 2004 13:52:43 -0500 Subject: Vetting SBC's VOIP http://www.lightreading.com/document.asp?site=lightreading&doc_id=63334 In a move that looks a bit cannibalistic, SBC Communications Inc. announced last week that it would begin offering residential VOIP service in early 2005, a move that will likely undercut the telecom giant's own traditional phone services. The big question here is: Will there be any suprises? So far, the answer appears to be no, as SBC is largely just catching up to the competition. Verizon Communications Inc., BellSouth Corp., Qwest Communications International Inc., and AT&T Corp. all have announced VOIP initiatives, each in various stages of implementation. Most have developed their VOIP systems in the enterprise arena and later migrated into the residential space, which is the pattern SBC is following. SBC sees the move as a way to offer next-generation services to its customers, expanding its lineup, and retaining those customers who want to be on the cutting edge. It can also bundle products to offer price savings. Full story at: http://www.lightreading.com/document.asp?site=lightreading&doc_id=63334 ------------------------------ Organization: Robert Bonomi Consulting Subject: Re: What Wal-Mart Knows About Customers' Habits From: bonomi@host122.r-bonomi.com (Robert Bonomi) Date: Wed, 24 Nov 2004 05:23:53 +0000 In article , > [TELECOM Digest Editor's Note: What you say is true, but I have been > in other stores when the same kind of problem came up, and they at > least apologize for any confusion and offer some free gift or > coupon for the trouble. Not Walmart though. One of the reasons the 'other stores' charge higher prices is the cost of such policies. > Our Chamber of Commerce has a thing called 'Main Street Gift > Certificates'. They sell them to you in any denomination wanted, and > they are redeemable at almost any store in town. They are great to > give as gifts when you do not know what to give the other person, or > they can be used for food at several restaurants. The redemptor turns > them in to the Chamber office less a *one percent* administrative fee. > Walmart, which refuses to belong to the Chamber of Commerce also > refuses to accept those gift certificates; I guess they do not feel > they should have to pay the one percent administrative fee charged > the redemptors. PAT] If you'd ever had any management experience with an even 'medium sized' business, you'd have an appreciation for how *EXPENSIVE* that kind of 'funny money' is to handle and process. Check out the fine print on almost any _manufacturer_ 'cents off' coupon. 20, 30, 50 cent 'discount' on the purchase price. And the store gets paid at least an additional _seven_cents_. That's 14%-35% *extra* for taking coupons. It is also about _break-even_ *cost* for handling that 'non-currency' piece of paper, and depositing through a centralized 'coupon clearinghouse' for reimbursement. Local C of C 'funny money' is *much* more expensive to handle. It does -not- go to the coupon clearinghouse for reconciliation. It has to be *manually* separated out from the other coupons, etc. and _manually_ sent over to the C of C for reimbursement. 'Store issued" coupons, gift-certificates, etc. *are* a 'whole nuther ball game'. You *don't* have to do any 'extra' handling of that 'paper'. Once the cashier's till has been 'counted down', to ensure that it balances against the 'tape', you can *throw*away* the store coupon -- it is just so much waste-paper. For that reason, store coupons _are_ 'cheaper' than actual cash, *or* checks, to process. High-volume 'discount' operations work by paring 'margin' (aka 'mark-up') to the *minimum*, and rely on volume to produce the profits. There just isn't any money in the budget for the 'non-essential' cost of such programs. Yes, they _could_ do it, but to do so, they would have to _raise_ prices at least somewhat, to cover the increased costs. Which runs contrary to the policy of 'lowest prices'. Available evidence says that 'lower prices' are worth more to the vast majority of customers than 'convenience' things like accepting C of C 'gift certificates'. In article , DevilsPGD wrote: > In message > bonomi@host122.r-bonomi.com (Robert Bonomi) wrote: >> There are *very* limited ways for a cashier to themselves steal cash >> money 'from the store', and approximately _one_ way to steal from the >> customers, with 'computerized' registers. >> Doing multiple charges against a card is simply *not* one of them. >> The audit trail catches it at the end-of-shift, or over-night, at >> worst. And the records point directly to the perp. > Sure. However, since the customer can request cash back it's another > way to steal. The cashier fakes problems scanning an item, punches in > the amount manually as cash, and gives the customer the item. > The customer isn't over charged, so has no reason to complain. > The cashier's till is now over -- Now she just needs to grab the cash > at some point during the transaction. No, the till is _not_ over. Punching in the amount as 'cash due' instead of scanning the item, is no different than scanning the item itself, as far as the cash balance in the till goes. The *only* difference is in the store 'inventory', where the proper item was -not- deducted from the count. Scanning (or failing to scan) the item, then punching 'cash received' in the same amount _deducts_ the amount from the '*remaining* payment due' from the customer, *and* records it as being 'already in the till'. At the end of the transaction, the 'balance due' and _collected_ from the customer is the 'actual purchases' _less_ the amount previously entered. this means that the till is _short_ that amount, not *long*. And it is _not_ in the cashier's pocket. In fact, the cashier must *PUT* that amount of money _into_ the till, to make the till balance. Note: most modern computerized cash-registers do _not_ let you enter 'monies received' while still entering 'charged items'. Once you hit a 'payment received' key, you cannot enter additional items onto _that_ transaction -- without voiding out all the payment received items, first, that is. And then you usually have to get the manager's "over-ride" key before you can go any further with the transaction. Robert Bonomi [TELECOM Digest Editor's Note: You make it sound as though local acceptance of local C of C gift certificates is going to be a major, massive processing operation in a small town like ours. You make it sound as though joining the local C of C in a small town to show support of other community merchants and share tips, ideas, etc is going to cause a major outlay for Walmart. You make it sound as though any modicum of customer service and goodwill is going to have an effect on their 'lower prices'. Walmart does have its own gift 'certificates' in the form of prepaid plastic credit cards, branded in their own name, in the 6011 series of numbers. Those are processed like credit card sales at the cash register, and must cost them something to process. Independence Walmart was giving away free coffee to senior citizens on *Tuesday morning only* provided the person could show they were over 65 years of age and provided the person actually bought some merchandise there. You showed your receipt and your proof of age; they then poured you one small cup of coffee, between 9-11 AM Tuesday only. Then several downtown stores started giving coffee and donuts on a daily basis to seniors (no proof of age required, just 'look old and feeble') and no requirement to buy anything from that particular store) and Walmart quit doing it. Its like they are so 'stand offish' toward the community they are supposedly serving. I don't make any claim to know about Walmart operations, but I do know that certain intangible things like customer goodwill are worth much more than a few extra cents of lower prices. What does it cost Walmart for a customer service person to call the taxicab and ask them 'have Jeff come by the Walmart grocery (or general merchandise) entrance for Mrs. Smith or whoever'. But no, the folks are free to use the COCOT phone on the sidewalk in front to make that call if they want, at fifty cents per call, (when the whole ride anywhere in town costs $1.50) ? Lower prices in the store, I guess. PAT] ------------------------------ From: Tony P. Subject: Re: What Wal-Mart Knows About Customers' Habits Organization: ATCC Date: Wed, 24 Nov 2004 10:06:17 -0500 In article , devilspgd@crazyhat.net says: > In message > bonomi@host122.r-bonomi.com (Robert Bonomi) wrote: >> There are *very* limited ways for a cashier to themselves steal cash >> money 'from the store', and approximately _one_ way to steal from the >> customers, with 'computerized' registers. >> Doing multiple charges against a card is simply *not* one of them. >> The audit trail catches it at the end-of-shift, or over-night, at >> worst. And the records point directly to the perp. > Sure. However, since the customer can request cash back it's another > way to steal. The cashier fakes problems scanning an item, punches in > the amount manually as cash, and gives the customer the item. > The customer isn't over charged, so has no reason to complain. > The cashier's till is now over -- Now she just needs to grab the cash > at some point during the transaction. Differences in transaction amounts show up on detail reports. I know -- I got really good at spotting manager screw ups for the small retail chain I used to work for. ------------------------------ Organization: Robert Bonomi Consulting Subject: Re: Anyone Having any Luck With Google Ads? From: bonomi@host122.r-bonomi.com (Robert Bonomi) Date: Wed, 24 Nov 2004 04:53:04 +0000 In article , DevilsPGD wrote: > As I understand it, Google ads require JavaScript to load. Every user > that hits your site without JavaScript, or with some adblocking > technology in place will count as a hit as far as you're concerned, > but not as far as Google is concerned. > [TELECOM Digest Editor's Note: This is true. Google does use > JavaScript. But Google would have no way of knowing what the user > did or did not have on his computer until it was time for the > javascript to be executed, and by then the hit would already have > been counted, wouldn't it? PAT] In a word, "NO". 1) The javascript is in -your- page. 2) If the user doesn't 'see' the ad/link, because the javascript to produce it isn't run, and the ad content is thus _not_ downloaded from their server then the 'impression' is not counted. 3) if 'activating' the link requires javascript, and they don't _have_ javascript, or javascript is disabled, obviously they _cannot_ 'click' on the link *successfully* -- and a 'pass through' hit is *not* counted. It _is_ possible to get a 'fairly' accurate count of how many times any ad was actually "seen" by people viewing your page. It *does* require a fair amount of skill in web-page programming, however. Starting with reverse- engineering the 'drop-in' code provided by google. Then you replace their target URL with a reference to a 'unique' URL on _your_own_ server. _THAT_ page does not 'really' exist. it just returns a 'redirect' to the _actual_ google ad image. *BUT*, you get a 'hit' in _your_ logs on that dummy page, every time the ad is pulled up. Note, _even_ this method will somewhat *overstate* the actual counts. Not just for Google, but for anybody who in the business of 'serving' ads -- e.g. doubleclick.com *spit* -- the ads tend to live on _dedicated_ machines in the source domain. An INCREASING number of people are using 'router' filters that block _any_ access to those *specific* servers. As a result, when the web-browser tries to retrieve the ad, the router blocking steps in, and returns either a 'host not found', or 'page not found' error, and the 'request' _never_ even gets to the server to be counted. The 'internal redirect' is the _closest_ *you* can get to an accurate count. But, beyond that, either you trust the ad provider, or you don't. If you *don't* trust them, you _really_ should be doing business with 'somebody else'. The _long-established_ methodology for 'keeping somebody honest', where -they- are the ones who compute 'how much money _they_owe_you_', is to: (a) have the *contractual*right* to 'audit' their books and records, or (b) have such 'audits' done by a trusted third-party -- e.g., the 'Audit Bureau for Circulations' for print publications. When a gnat is contracting with an 800-lb gorilla, the likelihood of _getting_ such 'audit' privileges is *damn* unlikely. You either "trust" them not to screw you; or you go into the deal _knowing_ that getting screwed is likely, and have decided that the 'other benefits' are _worth_ the screwing. [TELECOM Digest Editor's Note: Why couldn't I use a vistor counting mechanism from another third party such as I used to have on the old web site which I got from Microsoft? PAT] ------------------------------ From: jtaylor Subject: Re: How Do I Learn an Unknown Number? Date: Wed, 24 Nov 2004 08:51:44 -0400 Organization: MCI Canada News Reader Service Nathan Strom wrote in message news:telecom23.563.10@telecom-digest.org: > rekingus@yahoo.com (reking) wrote in message > news:: >> Anyone know how I can retrieve a phone number for a line that I have >> recently discovered within our business. >> SBC is our carrier but they tell me I would have to have someone come >> out and trace the line at a charge. Is there a way of determining the >> nimber by using some code entered on the phone. > If there's a dialtone on the line, hook up a phone and try calling > 1-888-902-9998. It should read back the number of the calling phone. > [TELECOM Digest Editor's Note: I tried it just now and it worked fine > on my Vonage line, and also on my cell phone line. PAT] Whoopie! Works from the Great White North also! Who runs this? ------------------------------ From: rlangly@gmail.com (Ringo Langly) Subject: Re: Dropping SBC For a VoIP Solution -- Vonage or Packet8 ?? Date: 24 Nov 2004 06:25:24 -0800 Organization: http://groups.google.com John McHarry wrote in message news:: > I have Packet8 because I could not get a local Vonage number, and they > are a bit less expensive. It is good enough for me, although not quite > landline quality. It is probably slightly better than cellular, but > there is noticeable delay and degradation when talking to a cell > phone, probably due to the double compression. > I made one international call to Germany, which didn't last long > enough to get a good notion of the quality, but the return call seemed > to sound better, so I wonder about the quality of the transatlantic > link. > Soon after you get it you probably want to upgrade the firmware in the > interface box. It is painless, and there are fixes and features that > were not in the firmware as shipped. That may no longer be the case, > but it doesn't hurt to make sure. Hi John, I did order the Packet8 box on Monday, and with any luck it'll be in by Friday so I can play with it this weekend. They have the 30-day trial, so if it's not what I expect I'll send it back -- but I'm eager to check it out. I would've rather used Vonage, but like you Vonage isn't in my area yet. I'll post some reviews and notes about it when I get it. Also thanks for the firmware upgrade suggestion... does it have instructions on how to do this? Thanks and take care, Ringo ------------------------------ Date: Wed, 24 Nov 2004 13:00:34 EST From: Telecom dailyLead from USTA Subject: Broadband Use Doubled Between 2001 and 2003 Telecom dailyLead from USTA November 24, 2004 http://www.dailylead.com/latestIssue.jsp?i=17728&l=2017006 TODAY'S HEADLINES NEWS OF THE DAY * Report: Broadband use doubled between 2001 and 2003 BUSINESS & INDUSTRY WATCH * Verizon Wireless acquires new spectrum in Pennsylvania * SBC expands Wi-Fi reach * Bidders make initial offers for Sprint towers * Analyst: Cisco lost ground to Juniper in Q3 * Cingular plans job cuts USTA SPOTLIGHT * Order Your Copy of Gigabit Ethernet Today EMERGING TECHNOLOGIES * The future of VOD at Comcast REGULATORY & LEGISLATIVE * FCC: Millions took advantage of number portability rules EDITOR'S NOTE * The dailyLead will not be published Thursday or Friday Follow the link below to read quick summaries of these stories and others. http://www.dailylead.com/latestIssue.jsp?i=17728&l=2017006 ------------------------------ From: Forrest Nelson Subject: Fax Machine Transmission Test Date: Wed, 24 Nov 2004 10:11:24 -0800 Does anyone know of a way to test your fax machine for transmission performance. I have a machine or line that fails to receive without errors maybe every 25th time. Thanks, JF Nelson 206-829-7348 direct 206-256-0423 fax ------------------------------ From: kludge@panix.com (Scott Dorsey) Subject: Re: Trial Shows How Spammers Operate Date: 24 Nov 2004 13:40:54 -0500 Organization: Former users of Netcom shell (1989-2000) Dan Lanciani wrote: >jdj@now.here (jdj) wrote: >> On Wed, 17 Nov 2004 03:12:34 -0500, Dan Lanciani wrote: >>> Interesting. I didn't realize that this was considered a bad thing. >> There are a lot of people who equate receiving spam to stepping in >> what the cat leaves on the lawn. > This makes no sense. How exactly can you avoid "receiving spam"? By removing spammers. If every single one of us here went and injured a single spammer, the spam problem would be more or less gone. In fact, if one person beat Ralsky up with a baseball bat, I think we'd all see about a 50% drop in spam. > Obviously. But why should I care? The point of the response is to > tell people who were neither sending spam nor forging their address > that their mail has been incorrectly identified as spam. Note that I > do not include the body of the original message in my automated > response, so you can't use my filter to reflect spam to a third party. The problem is that the number of people in that category is a very small one, and the number of people who receive misdirected bounces is a very high one. The cure is worse than the disease. Note that on the whole, the vast majority of messages that your spam cleaner detects will actually be spam, and therefore will not have an accurate return address. In fact, the vast majority of messages received at all will actually be spam, if your statistics are anything like mine. I figure about 90% of the messages arriving at my server are spam, and that is after router filtering. scott -- "C'est un Nagra. C'est suisse, et tres, tres precis." ------------------------------ TELECOM Digest is an electronic journal devoted mostly but not exclusively to telecommunications topics. It is circulated anywhere there is email, in addition to various telecom forums on a variety of networks such as Compuserve and America On Line, Yahoo Groups, and other forums. It is also gatewayed to Usenet where it appears as the moderated newsgroup 'comp.dcom.telecom'. TELECOM Digest is a not-for-profit, mostly non-commercial educational service offered to the Internet by Patrick Townson. All the contents of the Digest are compilation-copyrighted. You may reprint articles in some other media on an occasional basis, but please attribute my work and that of the original author. Contact information: Patrick Townson/TELECOM Digest Post Office Box 50 Independence, KS 67301 Phone: 620-402-0134 Fax 1: 775-255-9970 Fax 2: 530-309-7234 Fax 3: 208-692-5145 Email: editor@telecom-digest.org Subscribe: telecom-subscribe@telecom-digest.org Unsubscribe:telecom-unsubscribe@telecom-digest.org This Digest is the oldest continuing e-journal about telecomm- unications on the Internet, having been founded in August, 1981 and published continuously since then. Our archives are available for your review/research. We believe we are the oldest e-zine/mailing list on the internet in any category! URL information: http://telecom-digest.org Anonymous FTP: mirror.lcs.mit.edu/telecom-archives/archives/ (or use our mirror site: ftp.epix.net/pub/telecom-archives) Email <==> FTP: telecom-archives@telecom-digest.org Send a simple, one line note to that automated address for a help file on how to use the automatic retrieval system for archives files. You can get desired files in email. ************************************************************************* * TELECOM Digest is partially funded by a grant from * * Judith Oppenheimer, President of ICB Inc. and purveyor of accurate * * 800 & Dot Com News, Intelligence, Analysis, and Consulting. * * http://ICBTollFree.com, http://1800TheExpert.com * * Views expressed herein should not be construed as representing * * views of Judith Oppenheimer or ICB Inc. * ************************************************************************* ICB Toll Free News. Contact information is not sold, rented or leased. One click a day feeds a person a meal. Go to http://www.thehungersite.com Copyright 2004 ICB, Inc. and TELECOM Digest. All rights reserved. Our attorney is Bill Levant, of Blue Bell, PA. ************************ DIRECTORY ASSISTANCE JUST 65 CENTS ONE OR TWO INQUIRIES CHARGED TO YOUR CREDIT CARD! REAL TIME, UP TO DATE! SPONSORED BY TELECOM DIGEST AND EASY411.COM SIGN UP AT http://www.easy411.com/telecomdigest ! ************************ --------------------------------------------------------------- Finally, the Digest is funded by gifts from generous readers such as yourself who provide funding in amounts deemed appropriate. Your help is important and appreciated. A suggested donation of fifty dollars per year per reader is considered appropriate. See our address above. Please make at least a single donation to cover the cost of processing your name to the mailing list. All opinions expressed herein are deemed to be those of the author. Any organizations listed are for identification purposes only and messages should not be considered any official expression by the organization. End of TELECOM Digest V23 #565 ****************************** From editor@telecom-digest.org Wed Nov 24 21:40:59 2004 Received: (from ptownson@localhost) by massis.lcs.mit.edu (8.11.6p3/8.11.6) id iAP2exp01713; Wed, 24 Nov 2004 21:40:59 -0500 (EST) Date: Wed, 24 Nov 2004 21:40:59 -0500 (EST) From: editor@telecom-digest.org Message-Id: <200411250240.iAP2exp01713@massis.lcs.mit.edu> X-Authentication-Warning: massis.lcs.mit.edu: ptownson set sender to editor@telecom-digest.org using -f To: ptownson Approved: patsnewlist Subject: TELECOM Digest V23 #566 TELECOM Digest Wed, 24 Nov 2004 21:40:00 EST Volume 23 : Issue 566 Inside This Issue: Happy Thanksgiving to All! RBOCs Seeking Quick Checkmate On VoIP (Lisa Minter) Re: Sears and K-Mart (Lisa Hancock) Re: The Persuaders (Lisa Hancock) Re: How to Pronounce "Skype" (Joseph) Re: Bofra Exploit Hits The Register Ad Serving Supplier (Monty Solomon) Re: How Do I Learn an Unknown Number? (Andrew Bell) Re: How Do I Learn an Unknown Number? (Tony P.) Article On How Hot Telecom Jobs Were (Tamra Burgwardt) Re: Trial Shows How Spammers Operate (Dan Lanciani) Re: Trial Shows How Spammers Operate (Slichter) Re: Lobbyists Try to Kill Philly Wireless Plan (Tony P.) Re: A-la-carte Pricing For Cable and Satellite TV (Tony P.) All contents here are copyrighted by Patrick Townson and the individual writers/correspondents. Articles may be used in other journals or newsgroups, provided the writer's name and the Digest are included in the fair use quote. By using -any name or email address- included herein for -any- reason other than responding to an article herein, you agree to pay a hundred dollars to the recipients of the email. =========================== Addresses herein are not to be added to any mailing list, nor to be sold or given away without explicit written consent. Chain letters, viruses, porn, spam, and miscellaneous junk are definitely unwelcome. We must fight spam for the same reason we fight crime: not because we are naive enough to believe that we will ever stamp it out, but because we do not want the kind of world that results when no one stands against crime. Geoffrey Welsh =========================== See the bottom of this issue for subscription and archive details and the name of our lawyer; other stuff of interest. ---------------------------------------------------------------------- From: Lisa Minter Date: Wed, 24 Nov 2004 13:30:32 -0500 Subject: RBOCs Seeking Quick Checkmate On VoIP [Note: There are a few links to other articles and web sites embedded in this article; therefore you may just want to go read it at the web site.] http://www.advancedippipeline.com/voip/53701340 By Paul Kapustka Advanced IP Pipeline As we predicted earlier this month, a Bush victory in the election would favor the incumbents in the telecom market. And without much delay, the RBOCs are already pressing their advantages with the hope of winning the Voice over IP battle before it even gets started. Last week, the spotlight belonged to SBC, with announcements all over the VoIP map. While SBC's entrance into the consumer-VoIP market is a positive addition to the competitive landscape, its clumsy attempt to paint its you-can't-run-your-VoIP-over-our-lines legal manuever as another positive fell flat on its face. Backpedaling furiously after a Wall Street Journal article pegged the "TipTop" service for what it truly is -- an attempt to legally force competitors to pay the highest current interconnection rates -- SBC issued one of the most-hilarious officialese statements of recent memory, saying that "some VoIP providers may find it more economical than what they are purchasing now." Sure, just in the same way that consumers may find it "more economical" to pay all their communications bills to one provider, even if the total is more expensive. That's the kind of doublespeak you can get used to as the RBOCs use their marketing and legal might to stomp all over the VoIP startups for as long as they can. The SBC announcements generated a lot of heat in the VoIP blogging world last week, with an insightful analysis from our friend Jeff Pulver among the better takes (make sure you scroll down for the 'reply' from what appears to be an SBC employee in the comments). Full story at: http://www.advancedippipeline.com/voip/53701340 ------------------------------ From: hancock4@bbs.cpcn.com (Lisa Hancock) Subject: Re: Sears and K-Mart Date: 24 Nov 2004 11:46:34 -0800 Steve Sobol wrote: > Verizon has a large operation here in the Victor Valley. Aside from > the five or six COs they have within fifteen mintues of each other, > they have a Verizon Plus retail store and a call center operation... The > Victorville CO on Mojave Drive is much larger than you'd normally > expect a CO to be, and since there are a large number of company > trucks, etc., in its parking lot, I assume it's some sort of regional > service center. ... So it makes sense to have a human presence here ... Verizon (Bell of PA) has a large suburban building just like you describe. Indeed, it once held a business office. So it's reasonable to ask why it isn't open to public walk-ins. I don't know their reasonings, but my guess is as follows: 1) Security: It is in a blue collar neighborhood that while not the worst, it is not the best either. The cable company does have a public office, but it is very tiny and basially only a thick security window through which to transact business. I think both utilities are justifiably concerned about a patron being dangerous. 2) Consistency: I suspect Verizon chose to go to a region-wide policy of no visitors for operating consistency, important when training and supporting a large group of employees. 3) Cost: It may be cheaper to have contracted official payment agents rather than have company employees do it. Some such agents charge a fee to the payer. Years ago many people did not have checking accounts and needed this, today more people have such accounts (though not all.) ------------------------------ From: hancock4@bbs.cpcn.com (Lisa Hancock) Subject: Re: The Persuaders Date: 24 Nov 2004 11:51:06 -0800 Organization: http://groups.google.com tom.horsley@att.net (Thomas A. Horsley) wrote > The most fascinating aspect of TV advertising is to listen to TV > executives telling their advertisers how effective TV ads are at > influencing viewers one day, then see them in a Senate hearing the > next day saying that violence on TV doesn't have any effect at all on > viewers who are far too smart to confuse fiction and reality. > I wish they would at least make up their minds about how influential > TV really is :-). Good point. Before there was TV Congress was criticizing the motion picture industry in the 1930s, especially on gangster pictures and other violence. One result was the motion picture code which among other things required the bad guys always get what's coming to them. TCM recently showed a movie made before that code and the host explained how the central character, who had killed someone, was able to escape without being caught because the movie was pre-code. FWIW, on this day way back Congress was working over the "Hollywood Ten" for being Communists. A very good book "Reds" by Ted Morgan discusses what went on in detail -- the abuses made by the government _as well as_ the fact those people were in fact active communists under party control. ------------------------------ From: Joseph Subject: Re: How to Pronounce "Skype" Date: Wed, 24 Nov 2004 12:16:43 -0800 Reply-To: JoeOfSeattle@yahoo.com On 23 Nov 2004 23:37:20 -0800, dnoam@il.ibm.com (Noam Avnery) wrote: > Hi, > Is it like "Hype" or like "Sky-pee"? When in doubt google! http://www.skype.com/help/faq/ Rhymes with ripe, hype, type, tripe, swipe, etc. ------------------------------ Date: Wed, 24 Nov 2004 16:03:30 -0500 From: Monty Solomon Subject: Re: Bofra Exploit Hits The Register ad Serving Supplier http://www.theregister.co.uk/2004/11/23/register_restores_adserver/ Register restores ad service By Team Register Site Notice On Saturday, The Register suspended service by third party ad serving supplier, Falk, following security issues detailed here. http://www.falkag.com/news.php?Id=26 Today we have restored the service, after satisfying ourselves that this problem is fixed. Falk's statement on what went wrong is here. Our thanks for all your emails. We appreciate the kind words and note the performance issues that many of you raise. We will be seeking to address this in coming weeks. At a rough guess, the number of Reg readers exposed to the Bofra /IFrame exploit was in the low hundreds. We have no means of estimating how many of these were protected by firewalls or anti-virus software protection. During the period Falk's service was compromised -- between 6.10am and 12.30pm on Saturday, 11660 unique individuals using Windows and IE6 visited The Register. We haven't drilled down the different flavours of Windows, but we assume that the majority were not on Windows XP SP2 boxes. Reader with Windows XP SP2 are protected from the Bofra /IFrame exploit, along with the rest of the non-Windows world. On average readers looked at three pages a pop. So that's around 35,000 pages in which the rogue ad could have been served. According to Falk, one in 30 requests for a banner ad were redirects to the site containing the bofra worm. If this is correct around 1,170 rogue ads were served on our site. We apologise again for exposing readers to this. We also urge readers using IE on Windows to switch browsers, at least until the iFrame exploit is patched properly. Here is advice from McAfee on removing the Bofra worm. http://us.mcafee.com/virusInfo/default.asp?id=description&virus_k=129629 ------------------------------ From: Andrew Bell Subject: Re: How Do I Learn an Unknown Number? Date: Wed, 24 Nov 2004 17:39:21 -0500 Nathan Strom wrote in message news:telecom23.563.10@telecom-digest.org: > rekingus@yahoo.com (reking) wrote in message > news:: >> Anyone know how I can retrieve a phone number for a line that I have >> recently discovered within our business. >> SBC is our carrier but they tell me I would have to have someone come >> out and trace the line at a charge. Is there a way of determining the >> nimber by using some code entered on the phone. > If there's a dialtone on the line, hook up a phone and try calling > 1-888-902-9998. It should read back the number of the calling phone. > [TELECOM Digest Editor's Note: I tried it just now and it worked fine > on my Vonage line, and also on my cell phone line. PAT] It seems to read back the caller ID info presented, not the ANI. I tried it from behind a PBX and got my DID number back. Andrew ------------------------------ From: Tony P. Subject: Re: How Do I Learn an Unknown Number? Organization: ATCC Date: Wed, 24 Nov 2004 20:44:04 -0500 In article , jtaylor@hfx.deletethis.andara.com says: > Nathan Strom wrote in message > news:telecom23.563.10@telecom-digest.org: >> rekingus@yahoo.com (reking) wrote in message >> news:: >>> Anyone know how I can retrieve a phone number for a line that I have >>> recently discovered within our business. >>> SBC is our carrier but they tell me I would have to have someone come >>> out and trace the line at a charge. Is there a way of determining the >>> nimber by using some code entered on the phone. >> If there's a dialtone on the line, hook up a phone and try calling >> 1-888-902-9998. It should read back the number of the calling phone. >> [TELECOM Digest Editor's Note: I tried it just now and it worked fine >> on my Vonage line, and also on my cell phone line. PAT] > Whoopie! Works from the Great White North also! > Who runs this? Interestingly it uses Caller ID data, not the BTN. I tried it using my Vonage VoIP phone which is currently using virtual number 401-608-nnnn, but it passes 401-621-nnnn as Caller ID and that's what the 888 number read back to me. ------------------------------ Date: Wed, 24 Nov 2004 15:06:17 PST From: Tamra Burgwardt Reply-To: tamraburgwardt@yahoo.com Subject: Article on How Hot Telecom Jobs Were Hi, I will be happy to donate to your website. I need a favor though. I am in a custody trial that starts next week adn one of the issues that is coming up is why I moved 3 times in 7 years as a telecom exec during the compeitive telecom heyday of that period from 1995 thru about 2001. Do you have any articles of that nature? That talk about how hot the jobs situation was during that period? I didn't see a link to search the old articles so I can't seem to find it on my own. Thank you in advance. Tamra Burgwardt 716-578-5295 "The Miracle of Life is waking up in the morning.'" ------------------------------ Date: Wed, 24 Nov 2004 18:49:13 EST From: Dan Lanciani Subject: Re: Trial Shows How Spammers Operate kludge@panix.com (Scott Dorsey) wrote: > In article , jdj > wrote: >> On Wed, 17 Nov 2004 03:12:34 -0500, Dan Lanciani wrote: >>> My filters respond to every (seemingly) spam message with a note >>> indicating how to bypass the filter if in fact the mail is not spam. >>> (Actually they do this only once per sender per some months, but you >>> get the idea.) I really can't just dump (seeming) spam in the bucket >>> since there are a few false positives. But I get 1500+ spams per day >>> and I can't look at them all. >> Chances are that your filters are sending responses to forged >> addresses. Occasionally I see messages like that and they are treated >> like spam, since they have nothing to do with me and responding to >> them is useless. They go to /dev/null. Until it's full. > I am totally inundated these days with misidirected challenge/response > messages and bounces from spammers that send out huge amounts of spam > using my e-mail in the return address. It's got to the point where I > just dump anything from mail-daemon or from postmaster addresses, and > I just dump anything that looks like a C/R. Under normal conditions I get only 20-30 of these per day so I try to look at them in case any really do represent something intended for me (or an interesting error). N.B. I'm not a big fan of pure C/R systems because of the obvious deadlock issues and the extraneous traffic. But I maintain that bouncing mail for content is no worse than bouncing it for any other reason, and explaining the reason as part of the bounce message is common sense. > When someone does a spam run with my return address, I will get ten > to fifteen thousand bounces in a 24 hour period. This is very > annoying. Yes. Happily I get those only every few months. > You _might_ do a lot better just to extract the first Received: line from > the header and send a complaint to wherever that came from. For example, > take the following procmail rule: > # Comcast dynamic addresses > :0 > |* ? /usr/local/bin/formail -xReceived: -uReceived: | grep > client.comcast.net > |cat $HOME/spam - | Mail -s "Your Spam" abuse@comcast.net > We can basically be sure that if something comes from a dynamically > allocated address on comcast, that it's spam from a zombie machine, so > the false positive rate on this is basically zero. Real mail from > comcast customers comes from the comcast mail server. I think that that would be an extremely bad idea for several reasons. First, it would fail to fulfill the primary purpose of responding: to inform false positives that an error has been made. Almost as important, it would require me to automatically create _outbound_ SMTP connections as a matter of course. That really is unsolicited email and, while I don't agree that it is actually "spam", it would provide the C/R haters ammunition to have my mail server blacklisted. As things stand I can almost always return my warning message via the incoming SMTP session that carries the spam. This has several advantages. First it avoids the issue of sending unsolicited email as above. Second, for cases where the spammer is connecting directly and not using a real relay it pretty much guarantees that bogus bounces will not make it back to the forged from address, thus sparing innocent users a little junk mail. > Of course, Comcast doesn't care and they won't do anything about the > complaints, but it will make you feel better to report the stuff > anyway. No, really, it won't make me feel better. :) I try to "feel" as little as possible about spam. I would feel very bad if I incorrectly reported someone for spamming, though. IMHO, too much "feeling" about spam -- keeping the War on Spam raging -- is a big part of the problem. There is a lot of empire building going on with hundreds of blacklists trying to punish various behaviors (apparently including in some cases the behavior of wanting to fight spam differently from the list's owner) yet ultimately doing little to prevent the increase of spam (let alone reduce it). This worries me in the same way that the anti-virus companies' dependence on the virus worries me. > And there are legitimate ISPs that do actually take care of > problems, although these days they are increasingly in the minority. Even if, say, 50% of them did something I'd still have way too much spam to look at. > Dan Lanciani wrote: >> jdj@now.here (jdj) wrote: >>> On Wed, 17 Nov 2004 03:12:34 -0500, Dan Lanciani wrote: >>>> Interesting. I didn't realize that this was considered a bad thing. >>> There are a lot of people who equate receiving spam to stepping in >>> what the cat leaves on the lawn. >> This makes no sense. How exactly can you avoid "receiving spam"? > By removing spammers. Sure, but you haven't mentioned a practical way to accomplish that. Like most people, I learned to avoid stepping in cat/dog/whatever droppings on the lawn within a few years of learning to walk. Avoiding "receiving spam" seems a tad harder, and I find it a bit insulting to equate "receiving spam" with being so careless as to step in "what the cat leaves on the lawn." Again IMHO, the way to eliminate spam is to make it an ineffective tool for profit, and the only way to do that at the end user level is to make it invisible. Yet when anyone suggests a way to do this, the anti-spam warriors always have some scare tactic ready, e.g., the classic quip that you will lose business by missing important email (as if most businesses answer any -- let alone spamish -- email these days). > If every single one of us here went and injured a single spammer, the > spam problem would be more or less gone. In fact, if one person beat > Ralsky up with a baseball bat, I think we'd all see about a 50% drop > in spam. Yes, it seems to be ok to propose totally absurd solutions since there is little danger of their being implemented. However, an approach that might actually hurt the spammers financially (e.g., my suggestion of sending a SYN for each URL they deliver to you) is very dangerous because someone might be sued. This seems to be typical of collective anti-spam efforts that succeed in their direct goal (e.g., punishing owners of open relays) yet do nothing in the long run to stop spam, even though that is supposedly their indirect goal. >> Obviously. But why should I care? The point of the response is to >> tell people who were neither sending spam nor forging their address >> that their mail has been incorrectly identified as spam. Note that I >> do not include the body of the original message in my automated >> response, so you can't use my filter to reflect spam to a third party. > The problem is that the number of people in that category is a very > small one, It is small, but it is still several per month. If I cannot bounce the messages with a warning I must look at them all. > and the number of people who receive misdirected bounces is > a very high one. That may or may not be true depending on the way the spam is sent in the first place. But even if it were true, do you really believe that it represents a significant burden over that created by other types of bounces (bad target address, over quota, sender not allowed, etc.)? The problem is that you are elevating spam to a level beyond any other email such that it cannot even be bounced legitimately. For anyone that does not wish to miss genuine email that leaves only the option of looking at (at least) the subject of every message. This has the effect of keeping spam in the spotlight and perpetuating the associated angry feelings. > The cure is worse than the disease. I don't buy it. First of all, it at least is a cure. There are many other purported cures that are worse than the disease (e.g., blocking legitimate ISP clients to leverage collateral damage and similar political intrigue) that seem to do little good for end users while feeding the ever-growing war. Second, is reading a bounce message really worse than reading a spam message? Certainly it is for the spammers because it defeats their purpose of maximum visibility. > Note that on the whole, the vast majority of messages that your spam > cleaner detects will actually be spam, and therefore will not have an > accurate return address. In fact, the vast majority of messages > received at all will actually be spam, if your statistics are anything > like mine. They are. However, it is a mistake to equate a forged address with a bounce that may actually reach a legitimate user. From the samples I have examined, an extremely large percentage of spam messages that I receive have nonsense addresses that simply do not exist. From connections that I have monitored and even interacted with, a large percentage of spam delivery sessions appear to come direct from spam sending software and not from a real relay. There is no way that the spam delivery software is going to forward my 550-style rejection message back to the forged from user, if that user exists at all. In order for my system to cause bounces to a real (innocent) user a spammer must not only forge that user's from address but also send the message through a full-fledged mail relay that is willing to package up a session transcript and mail it "back" to the user. I don't think this is a common scenario these days. If it really is a problem it could be solved by something like SPF with an option that says, "please silently drop mail with my envelope address that comes from an unauthorized relay rather than rejecting it." (And yes, I know SPF is another thing that anti-spam warriors hate. And yes, I do understand how SPF reduces the generality of SMTP relaying. Or at least I understand how it would reduce that generality if it had not already been reduced by the war on open relays. :) Oh, and I also understand the argument about zombies using their host's legitimate relay. (a) I don't see a lot of that kind of traffic and (b) I'm not convinced that I owe such users (whose machine would be, after all, spamming me) the duty to silently absorb their spam. They are not quite the same as the competely innocent victims or forgery. Anyway, as I said the the other correspondent in this thread, please feel free to have the last word. I realize that this is a religious issue and could be debated forever. However, I ask that you not assume that I haven't done some fairly extensive analysis before implementing my solution. Dan Lanciani ddl@danlan.*com ------------------------------ From: shlichter1@aol.com (Shlichter1) Date: 25 Nov 2004 02:22:10 GMT Organization: AOL http://www.aol.com Subject: Re: Trial Shows How Spammers Operate As we all know, that all it takes is a couple of people replying and buying something the scum is selling and his costs are paid. The only good spammer is a dead one!! Have you hunted one down today? I kill Spammers, Inc. A Rot in Hell Co. ------------------------------ From: Tony P. Subject: Re: Lobbyists Try to Kill Philly Wireless Plan Organization: ATCC Date: Wed, 24 Nov 2004 20:38:36 -0500 In article , monty@roscom.com says: > By MARC LEVY Associated Press Writer > HARRISBURG, Pa. (AP) -- Philadelphia's plan to offer inexpensive > wireless Internet as a municipal service _ the most ambitious yet by > major U.S. city _ has collided with commercial interests including the > local phone company, Verizon Communications Inc. > In fact, a bill on Gov. Ed Rendell's desk that could humble > Philadelphia's ambitions began 19 months ago as a proposal drafted by > lobbyists for telecommunications companies. > Regional and long-distance phone companies, who sell broadband > Internet to consumers and businesses, have in recent months > intensified a national campaign to quash municipal wireless > initiatives like Philadelphia's as dozens of cities and towns have > either begun or announced such plans _ from San Francisco to Chaska, > Minn., to St. Cloud, Fla. > Telecommunications companies are doubly worried because hundreds of > other municipalities provide broadband service over cable or telephone > lines. > The idea of cheap, municipally provided Internet as social leveler is > particularly appealing to big city politicians. > - http://finance.lycos.com/home/news/story.asp?story=45214162 These activities by Verizon and other ILEC's are disgusting. It is one of the reasons I moved away from Verizon. The other reason is I get the same service via VoIP for more than $50.00 a month less. Sorry -- if they'd walked away from their beloved tariff twenty years ago maybe they wouldn't have the problems they have now. [TELECOM Digest Editor's Note: Well, if *any of us* had known twenty years ago what we know today, things would have been a lot different. Had the people who did most of the development on email and SMTP twenty years ago known what they know today, do you think the spam problem would be as severe as it is? Bell did what they thought best twenty years ago also. PAT] ------------------------------ From: Tony P. Subject: Re: A-la-carte Pricing For Cable and Satellite TV Organization: ATCC Date: Wed, 24 Nov 2004 20:41:00 -0500 In article , nmclain@annsgarden.com says: > The FCC has released its report on a-la-carte pricing for cable TV and > satellite TV services (formally called "Report on the Packaging and > Sale of Video Programming Services To the Public"). It's posted on > the FCC website at > http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DOC-254432A1.pdf . > It's a huge document (129 pdf pages), but it's interesting to read. > Neal McLain Most people don't understand the concept that a la carte would cost more, not less. When a cable company offers a channel they pay the provider a fixed cost for the years contract. That cost is then spread among ALL subscribers. But lets see you took, oh, the Cramp Channel (Aka Lifetime) and offered it among others a la carte. The subscriber base would likely be smaller but the provider wouldn't want to adjust their price because there are real costs behind producing those programs. Nobody seems to understand this. So if you want to pay $30 a month just for the Cramp Channel -- be my guest. But the tiered system we have now pretty much works. ------------------------------ TELECOM Digest is an electronic journal devoted mostly but not exclusively to telecommunications topics. It is circulated anywhere there is email, in addition to various telecom forums on a variety of networks such as Compuserve and America On Line, Yahoo Groups, and other forums. It is also gatewayed to Usenet where it appears as the moderated newsgroup 'comp.dcom.telecom'. TELECOM Digest is a not-for-profit, mostly non-commercial educational service offered to the Internet by Patrick Townson. All the contents of the Digest are compilation-copyrighted. You may reprint articles in some other media on an occasional basis, but please attribute my work and that of the original author. Contact information: Patrick Townson/TELECOM Digest Post Office Box 50 Independence, KS 67301 Phone: 620-402-0134 Fax 1: 775-255-9970 Fax 2: 530-309-7234 Fax 3: 208-692-5145 Email: editor@telecom-digest.org Subscribe: telecom-subscribe@telecom-digest.org Unsubscribe:telecom-unsubscribe@telecom-digest.org This Digest is the oldest continuing e-journal about telecomm- unications on the Internet, having been founded in August, 1981 and published continuously since then. Our archives are available for your review/research. We believe we are the oldest e-zine/mailing list on the internet in any category! URL information: http://telecom-digest.org Anonymous FTP: mirror.lcs.mit.edu/telecom-archives/archives/ (or use our mirror site: ftp.epix.net/pub/telecom-archives) Email <==> FTP: telecom-archives@telecom-digest.org Send a simple, one line note to that automated address for a help file on how to use the automatic retrieval system for archives files. You can get desired files in email. ************************************************************************* * TELECOM Digest is partially funded by a grant from * * Judith Oppenheimer, President of ICB Inc. and purveyor of accurate * * 800 & Dot Com News, Intelligence, Analysis, and Consulting. * * http://ICBTollFree.com, http://1800TheExpert.com * * Views expressed herein should not be construed as representing * * views of Judith Oppenheimer or ICB Inc. * ************************************************************************* ICB Toll Free News. Contact information is not sold, rented or leased. One click a day feeds a person a meal. Go to http://www.thehungersite.com Copyright 2004 ICB, Inc. and TELECOM Digest. All rights reserved. Our attorney is Bill Levant, of Blue Bell, PA. ************************ DIRECTORY ASSISTANCE JUST 65 CENTS ONE OR TWO INQUIRIES CHARGED TO YOUR CREDIT CARD! REAL TIME, UP TO DATE! SPONSORED BY TELECOM DIGEST AND EASY411.COM SIGN UP AT http://www.easy411.com/telecomdigest ! ************************ --------------------------------------------------------------- Finally, the Digest is funded by gifts from generous readers such as yourself who provide funding in amounts deemed appropriate. Your help is important and appreciated. A suggested donation of fifty dollars per year per reader is considered appropriate. See our address above. Please make at least a single donation to cover the cost of processing your name to the mailing list. All opinions expressed herein are deemed to be those of the author. Any organizations listed are for identification purposes only and messages should not be considered any official expression by the organization. End of TELECOM Digest V23 #566 ****************************** From editor@telecom-digest.org Thu Nov 25 17:49:33 2004 Received: (from ptownson@localhost) by massis.lcs.mit.edu (8.11.6p3/8.11.6) id iAPMnXm12809; Thu, 25 Nov 2004 17:49:33 -0500 (EST) Date: Thu, 25 Nov 2004 17:49:33 -0500 (EST) From: editor@telecom-digest.org Message-Id: <200411252249.iAPMnXm12809@massis.lcs.mit.edu> X-Authentication-Warning: massis.lcs.mit.edu: ptownson set sender to editor@telecom-digest.org using -f To: ptownson Approved: patsnewlist Subject: TELECOM Digest V23 #567 TELECOM Digest Thu, 25 Nov 2004 17:46:00 EST Volume 23 : Issue 567 Inside This Issue: Happy Thanksgiving to All! Comcast Will Raise Cable Rates in January (Monty Solomon) Iconic Grilled Cheese Feeds Internet Frenzy (Monty Solomon) 'Frontline' Files an Eye-Opening Credit Report (Monty Solomon) FCC Chief Has Had Quite a Year (Monty Solomon) Telecom Bill Will Position Pennsylvania as National Leader (M Solomon) Re: Sears and K-Mart (Steve Sobol) Re: Sears and K-Mart (NoSpamForMe) Re: Anyone Having any Luck With Google Ads? (DevilsPGD) Re: What Wal-Mart Knows About Customers' Habits (DevilsPGD) Re: How to Pronounce "Skype" (DevilsPGD) Re: How to Pronounce "Skype" (Noam Avnery) Re: Bofra Exploit Hits The Register ad Serving Supplier (Robert Bonomi) Re: A-la-carte Pricing For Cable and Satellite TV (Neal Mclain) Re: How Do I Learn an Unknown Number? (Bill Burns) Re: How Do I Learn an Unknown Number? (Herb Stein) Re: The Persuaders (Henry) All contents here are copyrighted by Patrick Townson and the individual writers/correspondents. Articles may be used in other journals or newsgroups, provided the writer's name and the Digest are included in the fair use quote. By using -any name or email address- included herein for -any- reason other than responding to an article herein, you agree to pay a hundred dollars to the recipients of the email. =========================== Addresses herein are not to be added to any mailing list, nor to be sold or given away without explicit written consent. Chain letters, viruses, porn, spam, and miscellaneous junk are definitely unwelcome. We must fight spam for the same reason we fight crime: not because we are naive enough to believe that we will ever stamp it out, but because we do not want the kind of world that results when no one stands against crime. Geoffrey Welsh =========================== See the bottom of this issue for subscription and archive details and the name of our lawyer; other stuff of interest. ---------------------------------------------------------------------- Date: Thu, 25 Nov 2004 00:49:57 -0500 From: Monty Solomon Subject: Comcast Will Raise Cable Rates in January By Peter J. Howe, Globe Staff In what has become as much of a Thanksgiving tradition as stuffed turkey and football, Comcast Corp. moved yesterday to raise New England cable television rates by an average 5.9 percent starting in January. Actual increases vary among towns, however, and in Boston consumers will see the smallest rate increase in 15 years, city officials said. Comcast, which now controls cable systems formerly operated by a half-dozen different operators, is moving toward standardizing rates in the more than 350 New England communities where it provides cable TV. In Massachusetts, the average monthly price for standard cable service will rise to $45.95 from $43.39, excluding whatever franchise fee the local government charges, according to Comcast spokeswoman Jennifer L. Khoury. Digital cable packages will increase by an average of $1, offset by a 45-cent-per-month reduction in the cable set-top box rental fee in about 95 percent of Bay State communities serviced by Comcast. The company has over 1.5 million customers in Massachusetts. http://www.boston.com/business/articles/2004/11/24/comcast_will_raise_cable_rates_in_january/ ------------------------------ Date: Thu, 25 Nov 2004 00:54:30 -0500 From: Monty Solomon Subject: Iconic Grilled Cheese Feeds Internet Frenzy By Don Aucoin, Globe Staff Diana Duyser will become $28,000 richer today, stand at the center of a media spotlight, and embark on a nationwide tour starring herself -- and all it cost her was a 10-year-old sandwich. Not just any sandwich, of course. In one of the more bizarre sequences of the Internet era -- or any era -- Duyser reaped her windfall by going on eBay to auction off a grilled cheese sandwich on which, she claims, resides the image of none other than the Virgin Mary. In only two weeks, the posting triggered nearly 2 million page views, making it one of most popular listings in eBay's history. Equally remarkable was the viruslike speed with which the online auction site became crowded with scores of products that were half-spoof, half-spinoff: Virgin Mary Grilled Cheese lunchboxes, greeting cards, T-shirts featuring President Bush and posters of Governor Arnold Schwarzenegger of California with the sandwich, refrigerator magnets, paintings, a "Low Carb Virgin Mary Grilled Cheese recipe," even an Internet domain address. http://www.boston.com/news/globe/living/articles/2004/11/24/iconic_grilled_cheese_feeds_internet_frenzy/ Bidding ends at $28K for cheese sandwich November 23, 2004 HOLLYWOOD, Fla. -- A woman who said her 10-year-old grilled cheese sandwich bore the image of the Virgin Mary will be getting a lot more bread after the item sold for $28,000 on eBay . GoldenPalace.com, an online casino, confirmed that it placed the winning bid, and company executives said they were willing to spend "as much as it took" to own the 10-year-old half-sandwich with a bite out of it. http://www.boston.com/news/odd/articles/2004/11/23/bidding_ends_at_28k_for_cheese_sandwich/ ------------------------------ Date: Thu, 25 Nov 2004 01:23:41 -0500 From: Monty Solomon Subject: 'Frontline' Files an Eye-Opening Credit Report TELEVISION REVIEW By Joanna Weiss, Globe Staff | November 22, 2004 All you really need to know about the credit card industry can be summed up in the look on Ed Yingling's face as he sits across from reporter Lowell Bergman in this week's " Frontline " episode. Yingling is the top lobbyist for the banking industry and, more specifically, the flak catcher, sent out to answer every query assembled by the research arms of PBS and The New York Times. And when Bergman asks why no major credit card companies will talk to him, Yingling looks knowingly, almost apologetically wry. "They pay us dues," he says, "to handle these kinds of sometimes-difficult assignments." Yes, it's pretty clear that if "Frontline" sets out to examine the $30 billion credit card industry, the banks aren't going to be the good guys. And "Secret History of the Credit Card," the hourlong show that airs tomorrow at 9 p.m. on WGBH-TV (Channel 2), is a damning report about an industry that preys on consumer naivete and, perhaps just as disturbing, the consumers who run willingly into its traps. Just in time for the holiday spending season, "Frontline" does us the service of finally reading the fine print on those long, eye-numbing credit card contracts, and what's inside isn't pleasant: fees that generate increasing amounts of revenue, loan rates that can quickly climb as high as 30 percent and can be changed at any time, even if, for example, you're late paying an unrelated bill. The result is a teetering financial crisis: The average American family carries $7,500 in credit card debt. Secret History of the Credit Card http://www.pbs.org/wgbh/pages/frontline/shows/credit/ Watch online http://www.pbs.org/wgbh/pages/frontline/shows/credit/view/ ------------------------------ Date: Thu, 25 Nov 2004 01:25:25 -0500 From: Monty Solomon Subject: FCC Chief Has Had Quite a Year LIFE IN THE POP LANE By Rene Graham, Globe Staff It's the season for Time editors to mull possible candidates for its 2004 Person of the Year. According to the magazine's criteria, the final selection will be "the person or persons who most affected the news and our lives, for good or ill, and embodied what was important about the year, for better or worse." To that end, among those being considered are filmmakers Michael Moore and Mel Gibson, as well as White House adviser Karl Rove, who has been largely credited as the mastermind behind President Bush's reelection. Interesting choices all, but here's an even better suggestion -- Michael Powell, chairman of the Federal Communications Commission. From driving Howard Stern to announce a 2006 move to satellite radio to making ABC affiliates so skittish about airing a film with graphic violence and profanity that more than a third canceled a Veterans Day airing of "Saving Private Ryan," no individual this year has had a greater effect on our cultural lives -- for good or ill, for better or worse -- than Powell. He was again in the news last week for criticizing ABC's ill-advised opening for "Monday Night Football," featuring a towel-clad Nicollette Sheridan, of "Desperate Housewives," seducing Terrell Owens of the Philadelphia Eagles. The FCC is considering opening an investigation that could result in a fine against ABC. Created in 1934, the FCC, according to its website, is "charged with regulating interstate and international communications by radio, television, wire, satellite and cable." Yet as this nation continues its unnerving lurch toward conservative sanctimony, Powell, nominated to the FCC in 1997 by President Clinton and designated chairman by President Bush in 2001, has positioned himself as our country's top cop for good taste and cultural propriety. Subject: Telecom Bill Will Position Pennsylvania as National Leader Telecom Bill Will Position Pennsylvania as National Leader in Advanced Telecommunications, Broadband Deployment - Nov 24, 2004 03:57 PM (PR Newswire) Facts Disprove Coalition's Misleading Claims HARRISBURG, Pa., Nov. 24 /PRNewswire/ -- Contrary to misleading claims by competitors, a recent telecommunications bill passed by the Pennsylvania General Assembly represents the most aggressive, comprehensive broadband network deployment plan in the United States, providing significant benefits for the state's consumers, as well as its educational and business communities. In a recent news release, the Pennsylvania Carriers' Coalition claimed that telecom competition is threatened here and that Pennsylvania lags behind other states in broadband services. - http://finance.lycos.com/home/news/story.asp?story=45239818 ------------------------------ From: Steve Sobol Subject: Re: Sears and K-Mart Date: Wed, 24 Nov 2004 20:48:36 -0800 Organization: Glorb Internet Services, http://www.glorb.com Lisa Hancock wrote: > 1) Security: It is in a blue collar neighborhood that while not the > worst, it is not the best either. The cable company does have a > public office, but it is very tiny and basially only a thick security > window through which to transact business. I think both utilities are > justifiably concerned about a patron being dangerous. > 2) Consistency: I suspect Verizon chose to go to a region-wide policy > of no visitors for operating consistency, important when training and > supporting a large group of employees. > 3) Cost: It may be cheaper to have contracted official payment agents > rather than have company employees do it. Some such agents charge a > fee to the payer. Years ago many people did not have checking > accounts and needed this, today more people have such accounts (though > not all.) 4) Your Verizon used to be Bell Atlantic, my Verizon used to be GTE? Lisa Hancock wrote: > 1) Security: It is in a blue collar neighborhood that while not the > worst, it is not the best either. The cable company does have a > public office, but it is very tiny and basially only a thick security > window through which to transact business. I think both utilities are > justifiably concerned about a patron being dangerous. The Verizon Plus store, incidentally, is located in a middle-class neighborhood, so crime isn't too much of an issue, although it's not too far from a few other neighborhoods where it might be an issue. JustThe.net Internet & New Media Services, http://JustThe.net/ Steven J. Sobol, Geek In Charge / 888.480.4NET (4638) / sjsobol@JustThe.net PGP Key available from your friendly local key server (0xE3AE35ED) Apple Valley, California Nothing scares me anymore. I have three kids. ------------------------------ From: NoSpamForMe Subject: Re: Sears and K-Mart Organization: AT&T Worldnet Date: Thu, 25 Nov 2004 16:57:58 GMT Lisa Hancock wrote in message news:telecom23.566.2@telecom-digest.org: > Verizon (Bell of PA) has a large suburban building just like you > describe. Indeed, it once held a business office. So it's reasonable > to ask why it isn't open to public walk-ins. > I don't know their reasonings, but my guess is as follows: > 1) Security: (...snip...) > 2) Consistency: (...snip...) > 3) Cost: (....snip...) 4) Liability? It's got to be cheaper insurance-wise & risk management-wise to prohibit public access. Makes sense to me, anyhow. ------------------------------ From: DevilsPGD Subject: Re: Anyone Having any Luck With Google Ads? Date: Wed, 24 Nov 2004 20:18:23 -0700 Organization: Posted via Supernews, http://www.supernews.com In message bonomi@host122.r-bonomi.com (Robert Bonomi) wrote: > It _is_ possible to get a 'fairly' accurate count of how many times > any ad was actually "seen" by people viewing your page. It *does* > require a fair amount of skill in web-page programming, however. > Starting with reverse- engineering the 'drop-in' code provided by > google. Then you replace their target URL with a reference to a > 'unique' URL on _your_own_ server. _THAT_ page does not 'really' > exist. it just returns a 'redirect' to the _actual_ google ad image. > *BUT*, you get a 'hit' in _your_ logs on that dummy page, every time > the ad is pulled up. You don't need to go to all the hassle of redirecting it, just add a second JS block (above or below) which points to a location on your website. > Note, _even_ this method will somewhat *overstate* the actual counts. > Not just for Google, but for anybody who in the business of 'serving' > ads -- e.g. doubleclick.com *spit* -- the ads tend to live on > _dedicated_ machines in the source domain. An INCREASING number of > people are using 'router' filters that block _any_ access to those > *specific* servers. As a result, when the web-browser tries to > retrieve the ad, the router blocking steps in, and returns either a > 'host not found', or 'page not found' error, and the 'request' _never_ > even gets to the server to be counted. It can be part of the browser (FireFox' Adblocker extension, for instance) too. The cigarette does the smoking, you're just the sucker. ------------------------------ From: DevilsPGD Subject: Re: What Wal-Mart Knows About Customers' Habits Date: Wed, 24 Nov 2004 20:18:23 -0700 Organization: Posted via Supernews, http://www.supernews.com In message bonomi@host122.r-bonomi.com (Robert Bonomi) wrote: >> Sure. However, since the customer can request cash back it's another >> way to steal. The cashier fakes problems scanning an item, punches in >> the amount manually as cash, and gives the customer the item. >> The customer isn't over charged, so has no reason to complain. >> The cashier's till is now over -- Now she just needs to grab the cash >> at some point during the transaction. > No, the till is _not_ over. Punching in the amount as 'cash due' > instead of scanning the item, is no different than scanning the item > itself, as far as the cash balance in the till goes. The *only* > difference is in the store 'inventory', where the proper item was > -not- deducted from the count. I wasn't clear enough ... Not "Punches the amount as cash from the customer", I meant "punches in a cash back request for the same amount" In essence a cash back request means the customer is purchasing cash from the till. This gets the cash out of the till (and into the cashier's pocket), plus of course it screws up inventory. Another twist would be to activate a $20 gift card instead of ringing up a purchase of just over $20. This would be more likely to get caught though, since you then have to spend the gift card at some point. > [TELECOM Digest Editor's Note: You make it sound as though local > acceptance of local C of C gift certificates is going to be a major, > massive processing operation in a small town like ours. You make it > sound as though joining the local C of C in a small town to show > support of other community merchants and share tips, ideas, etc is > going to cause a major outlay for Walmart. You make it sound as though > any modicum of customer service and goodwill is going to have an > effect on their 'lower prices'. Unfortunately doing anything unique / "local" will probably cost more money in the bureaucracy of accounting for the C of C gift certificates then they could possibly bring in. > Walmart does have its own gift 'certificates' in the form of prepaid > plastic credit cards, branded in their own name, in the 6011 series > of numbers. Those are processed like credit card sales at the cash > register, and must cost them something to process. As a general rule those cards make money due to administration fees that let Walmart keep the leftover money if a card gets lost or destroyed, or otherwise goes unused. Plus, like all gift certificate type programs, it gets the money out of the customer's hand sooner, which means Walmart can invest the money now. The cost to manage the cards shouldn't be substantial. The cigarette does the smoking, you're just the sucker. ------------------------------ From: DevilsPGD Subject: Re: How to Pronounce "Skype" Date: Wed, 24 Nov 2004 20:18:23 -0700 Organization: Posted via Supernews, http://www.supernews.com In message dnoam@il.ibm.com (Noam Avnery) wrote: > Is it like "Hype" or like "Sky-pee"? Hype ... The cigarette does the smoking, you're just the sucker. ------------------------------ From: dnoam@il.ibm.com (Noam Avnery) Subject: Re: How to Pronounce "Skype" Date: 25 Nov 2004 00:30:41 -0800 Organization: http://groups.google.com Joseph wrote in message news:: > When in doubt google! > http://www.skype.com/help/faq/ > Rhymes with ripe, hype, type, tripe, swipe, etc. True, true {blush}. Thanks for the reply. Another phrase to go along with RTFM I guess. ------------------------------ Organization: Robert Bonomi Consulting Subject: Re: Bofra Exploit Hits The Register ad Serving Supplier From: bonomi@host122.r-bonomi.com (Robert Bonomi) Date: Thu, 25 Nov 2004 13:11:38 +0000 Does anybody else find the following to be inconsistent 'spin' ? In article , Monty Solomon wrote: > http://www.theregister.co.uk/2004/11/23/register_restores_adserver/ > Register restores ad service > By Team Register [[.. munch ..]] > At a rough guess, the number of Reg readers exposed to the Bofra > /IFrame exploit was in the low hundreds. ... > During the period Falk's service was compromised -- between 6.10am and > 12.30pm on Saturday, 11660 unique individuals using Windows and IE6 ============================================== [[.. munch ..]] > readers looked at three pages a pop. So that's around 35,000 pages in > which the rogue ad could have been served. According to Falk, one in > 30 requests for a banner ad were redirects to the site containing the > bofra worm. If this is correct around 1,170 rogue ads were served on ====================== > our site. Is this some kind of metric measurement, where 1,170 is in the "_low_ hundreds" ?? > We apologise again for exposing readers to this. We also urge readers > using IE on Windows to switch browsers, at least until the iFrame > exploit is patched properly. [[ Microsoft has got to _love_ that kind of publicity. *snicker ]] ------------------------------ Date: Thu, 25 Nov 2004 12:34:28 -0700 From: nmclain@annsgarden.com Subject: Re: A-la-carte Pricing For Cable and Satellite TV I wrote: > The FCC has released its report on a-la-carte pricing for cable TV > and satellite TV services (formally called "Report on the Packaging > and Sale of Video Programming Services To the Public"). It's posted > on the FCC website at > http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DOC-254432A1.pdf . Whereupon Tony P. wrote: > Most people don't understand the concept that a la carte > would cost more, not less. > When a cable company offers a channel they pay the > provider a fixed cost for the years contract. Actually, a cable (or satellite) company pays each program provider a "license fee" (aka "affiliate fee" or "wholesale rate") that's calculated on a *per subscriber* basis. It's not a "fixed cost" except in the sense that it's fixed for each retail subscriber for the life of the affiliation contract between the cable/sat company and the program provider. Every month, the cable/sat company reports the number of retail subscribers to each program provider, which then calculates the monthly bill based on that month's subscribership. If the number of subscribers is reduced, the provider's revenue is reduced accordingly. > That cost is then spread among ALL subscribers. But lets > see you took, oh, the Cramp Channel (Aka Lifetime) and > offered it among others a la carte. The subscriber base > would likely be smaller but the provider wouldn't want to > adjust their price because there are real costs behind > producing those programs. The subscriber base would indeed be much smaller, with two results: - The program provider's license-fee revenue would be smaller in direct proportion to the reduction in the subscriber base. - The program provider's advertising revenue would be substantially smaller, although probably not quite in direct proportion because the programmer might be able to raise its ad rates somewhat. To offset these losses, the program provider would have to substantially *increase* its license fee and/or curtail its programming budget. In my previous post on this subject, I estimated that license fees would increase by 400%: http://massis.lcs.mit.edu/archives/reports/alacarte-cable-service Apparently I underestimated the increase. The FCC's report (quoting a study by Booz Allen) states: Affiliate fees. . . To maintain current cash flow in a pure a la carte environment, all of the networks in the study's segments would have to raise their affiliation fees by at least 400% and ranging up to nearly 2500%. -- FCC report, II-C, "Analysis of Booz Allen Hamilton Economic Study," 90-91 (pdf pages 91-92). > Nobody seems to understand this. Least of all Consumers Union. Neal McLain ------------------------------ From: Bill Burns Subject: Re: How Do I Learn an Unknown Number? Date: 25 Nov 2004 04:23:55 GMT Organization: FTL Andrew Bell wrote: > Nathan Strom wrote: >> If there's a dialtone on the line, hook up a phone and try >> calling 1-888-902-9998. It should read back the number of the >> calling phone. > It seems to read back the caller ID info presented, not the ANI. > I tried it from behind a PBX and got my DID number back. Googling on 1-888-902-9998 finds an interesting discussion thread: http://www.tek-tips.com/viewthread.cfm?qid=583069 which includes these useful notes: "Also check out 888-294-9681 - it gives you the voice circuit type and the number... will even do callback at the end of the call to confirm that it is working fine." and "Here is a nation wide ANI # from MCI 1-800-444-4444" Bill Burns, Long Island, NY, USA mailto:billb@ftldesign.com History of Technology Websites: http://ftldesign.com ------------------------------ From: Herb Stein Subject: Re: How Do I Learn an Unknown Number? Date: Wed, 24 Nov 2004 23:33:41 -0600 Tony P. wrote in message news:telecom23.566.7@telecom-digest.org: > In article , > jtaylor@hfx.deletethis.andara.com says: >> Nathan Strom wrote in message >> news:telecom23.563.10@telecom-digest.org: >>> rekingus@yahoo.com (reking) wrote in message >>> news:: >>>> Anyone know how I can retrieve a phone number for a line that I have >>>> recently discovered within our business. >>>> SBC is our carrier but they tell me I would have to have someone come >>>> out and trace the line at a charge. Is there a way of determining the >>>> nimber by using some code entered on the phone. >>> If there's a dialtone on the line, hook up a phone and try calling >>> 1-888-902-9998. It should read back the number of the calling phone. >>> [TELECOM Digest Editor's Note: I tried it just now and it worked fine >>> on my Vonage line, and also on my cell phone line. PAT] >> Whoopie! Works from the Great White North also! >> Who runs this? > Interestingly it uses Caller ID data, not the BTN. I tried it using my > Vonage VoIP phone which is currently using virtual number > 401-608-nnnn, but it passes 401-621-nnnn as Caller ID and that's what > the 888 number read back to me. Whwn I call from the number in my sig (Cingular cell), I get 636 536-4107. Maybe the number of my closest tower? Herb Stein herb@herbstein.com 314 952-4601 ------------------------------ From: henry999@eircom.net (Henry) Subject: Re: The Persuaders Date: Thu, 25 Nov 2004 07:49:24 +0200 Organization: Elisa Internet customer Lisa Hancock wrote: > ...the motion picture code...required the bad guys always get > what's coming to them. It's funny to watch those old gangster pictures now, especially when after 'The End' what I call the 'FBI message' fills the screen: CRIME DOES NOT PAY How times change, eh? Now we've got Tony Soprano. Cheers, Henry ------------------------------ TELECOM Digest is an electronic journal devoted mostly but not exclusively to telecommunications topics. It is circulated anywhere there is email, in addition to various telecom forums on a variety of networks such as Compuserve and America On Line, Yahoo Groups, and other forums. It is also gatewayed to Usenet where it appears as the moderated newsgroup 'comp.dcom.telecom'. TELECOM Digest is a not-for-profit, mostly non-commercial educational service offered to the Internet by Patrick Townson. All the contents of the Digest are compilation-copyrighted. You may reprint articles in some other media on an occasional basis, but please attribute my work and that of the original author. Contact information: Patrick Townson/TELECOM Digest Post Office Box 50 Independence, KS 67301 Phone: 620-402-0134 Fax 1: 775-255-9970 Fax 2: 530-309-7234 Fax 3: 208-692-5145 Email: editor@telecom-digest.org Subscribe: telecom-subscribe@telecom-digest.org Unsubscribe:telecom-unsubscribe@telecom-digest.org This Digest is the oldest continuing e-journal about telecomm- unications on the Internet, having been founded in August, 1981 and published continuously since then. Our archives are available for your review/research. We believe we are the oldest e-zine/mailing list on the internet in any category! URL information: http://telecom-digest.org Anonymous FTP: mirror.lcs.mit.edu/telecom-archives/archives/ (or use our mirror site: ftp.epix.net/pub/telecom-archives) Email <==> FTP: telecom-archives@telecom-digest.org Send a simple, one line note to that automated address for a help file on how to use the automatic retrieval system for archives files. You can get desired files in email. ************************************************************************* * TELECOM Digest is partially funded by a grant from * * Judith Oppenheimer, President of ICB Inc. and purveyor of accurate * * 800 & Dot Com News, Intelligence, Analysis, and Consulting. * * http://ICBTollFree.com, http://1800TheExpert.com * * Views expressed herein should not be construed as representing * * views of Judith Oppenheimer or ICB Inc. * ************************************************************************* ICB Toll Free News. Contact information is not sold, rented or leased. One click a day feeds a person a meal. Go to http://www.thehungersite.com Copyright 2004 ICB, Inc. and TELECOM Digest. All rights reserved. Our attorney is Bill Levant, of Blue Bell, PA. ************************ DIRECTORY ASSISTANCE JUST 65 CENTS ONE OR TWO INQUIRIES CHARGED TO YOUR CREDIT CARD! REAL TIME, UP TO DATE! SPONSORED BY TELECOM DIGEST AND EASY411.COM SIGN UP AT http://www.easy411.com/telecomdigest ! ************************ --------------------------------------------------------------- Finally, the Digest is funded by gifts from generous readers such as yourself who provide funding in amounts deemed appropriate. Your help is important and appreciated. A suggested donation of fifty dollars per year per reader is considered appropriate. See our address above. Please make at least a single donation to cover the cost of processing your name to the mailing list. All opinions expressed herein are deemed to be those of the author. Any organizations listed are for identification purposes only and messages should not be considered any official expression by the organization. End of TELECOM Digest V23 #567 ****************************** From editor@telecom-digest.org Thu Nov 25 23:05:36 2004 Received: (from ptownson@localhost) by massis.lcs.mit.edu (8.11.6p3/8.11.6) id iAQ45Zq15547; Thu, 25 Nov 2004 23:05:36 -0500 (EST) Date: Thu, 25 Nov 2004 23:05:36 -0500 (EST) From: editor@telecom-digest.org Message-Id: <200411260405.iAQ45Zq15547@massis.lcs.mit.edu> X-Authentication-Warning: massis.lcs.mit.edu: ptownson set sender to editor@telecom-digest.org using -f To: ptownson Approved: patsnewlist Subject: TELECOM Digest V23 #568 TELECOM Digest Thu, 25 Nov 2004 23:05:00 EST Volume 23 : Issue 568 Inside This Issue: Editor: Patrick A. Townson Film Studios Win $24 Million Against Web Site (Lisa Minter) Cyber Cops Say 'Tis the Season to Be Wary (Lisa Minter) EBay Uses Snail-Mail to Hook New Users (Lisa Minter) Linksys RT31P2 VPN PPTP Port 1723 Problems (Dee Anthony) Questions on WML/WAP [Push]/HTTP/Cell-Carrier/Telco (Jimmy) Re: Telecom Bill Will Position Pennsylvania as National Leader (McHarry) Re: Dropping SBC For a VoIP Solution -- Vonage or Packet8 (John McHarry) Tis the Season (TELECOM Digest Editor) All contents here are copyrighted by Patrick Townson and the individual writers/correspondents. Articles may be used in other journals or newsgroups, provided the writer's name and the Digest are included in the fair use quote. By using -any name or email address- included herein for -any- reason other than responding to an article herein, you agree to pay a hundred dollars to the recipients of the email. =========================== Addresses herein are not to be added to any mailing list, nor to be sold or given away without explicit written consent. Chain letters, viruses, porn, spam, and miscellaneous junk are definitely unwelcome. We must fight spam for the same reason we fight crime: not because we are naive enough to believe that we will ever stamp it out, but because we do not want the kind of world that results when no one stands against crime. Geoffrey Welsh =========================== See the bottom of this issue for subscription and archive details and the name of our lawyer; other stuff of interest. ---------------------------------------------------------------------- From: Lisa Minter Subject: Film Studios Win $24 Million Against Web Site Date: Thu, 25 Nov 2004 11:28:19 EST LOS ANGELES (Reuters) - Hollywood's major movie studios said they won a $23.8 million judgment against a California company and its Malaysian owner for operating a Web site that charged customers to download illegally copied movies. The company, MasterSurf Inc, is owned by Tan Soo Leong, and it operated a site called Film88.com, according to a statement by the Motion Picture Association of America, which represents the studios in governmental and industry matters. The award was handed down earlier this week in U.S. District Court in Los Angeles as a default judgment, meaning the defendants never responded, according to the MPAA. The defendants could not be reached for comment. The studios want to amass legal rulings against Web sites offering illegal copies of films for downloading as they press their campaign against copyright piracy. The studios claim illegal copying and distribution of movies on videos and DVDs cost them more than $3.5 billion annually, and they are concerned that distributing illegal film copies on the Internet will cost them billions more. They have mounted educational and legal efforts aimed to end copyright piracy, and are now suing individual users who copy and share digital copies of movies via the Web. Reuters/VNU *** FAIR USE NOTICE. This message contains copyrighted material the use of which has not been specifically authorized by the copyright owner. This Internet discussion group is making it available without profit to group members who have expressed a prior interest in receiving the included information in their efforts to advance the understanding of literary, educational, political, and economic issues, for non-profit research and educational purposes only. I believe that this constitutes a 'fair use' of the copyrighted material as provided for in section 107 of the U.S. Copyright Law. If you wish to use this copyrighted material for purposes of your own that go beyond 'fair use,' you must obtain permission from the copyright owner, in this instance Reuters News Service/VNU. For more information go to: http://www.law.cornell.edu/uscode/17/107.shtml ------------------------------ From: Lisa Minter Subject: Cyber Cops Say 'Tis the Season to Be Wary Date: Thu, 25 Nov 2004 11:32:46 EST SAN FRANCISCO (Reuters) - As the holiday shopping season ramps up, cyber cops warned on Wednesday that online fraudsters are working over time. Analysts from the Global Threat Command Team at Web and e-mail filtering company SurfControl (SRF.L) said phishing attacks -- spam e-mails in which scammers lure people into divulging personal or financial information -- are becoming increasingly sophisticated and growing at a month-over-month rate of 20 percent to 25 percent. Prior phishing scams were somewhat easy to spot. Either the lure was rife with misspellings, or potential victims clicked on links that routed them to ersatz sites that tried to appear legitimate but didn't look quite right. But new scams are more sophisticated and harder to identify as phishers employ spammers, hackers, virus writers, and Web designers. "'Tis the season when people will be most vulnerable to such scams," said Susan Larson, SurfControl's president of global contacts. In one of the latest attacks, a phishing e-mail claimed to be confirming an eBay purchase made through the Web auctioneer's PayPal online payment system. The e-mail, which requested information that could be used to steal money from the victim's bank accounts or credit cards, was fraudulent. BEWARE CYBER SANTAS Others look more innocuous but contribute to the problem. One offers to send children a Christmas greeting from Santa in exchange for home or e-mail addresses. Another asks for similar personal information and promises participants a $200 gift card from Macy's department store. Larson said the latter cases are probably examples of groups that are harvesting live e-mail addresses to sell. "There is no Santa Claus coming to you this season on e-mail," she added. Larson said consumers should continue to be very wary of unsolicited e-mail. She and others reiterated their recommendation that consumers never give out personal or account information by e-mail. If consumers need to respond to an e-mail information request, Larson recommends that they go directly to the site themselves and that they avoid following links provided in e-mail. *** FAIR USE NOTICE. This message contains copyrighted material the use of which has not been specifically authorized by the copyright owner. This Internet discussion group is making it available without profit to group members who have expressed a prior interest in receiving the included information in their efforts to advance the understanding of literary, educational, political, and economic issues, for non-profit research and educational purposes only. I believe that this constitutes a 'fair use' of the copyrighted material as provided for in section 107 of the U.S. Copyright Law. If you wish to use this copyrighted material for purposes of your own that go beyond 'fair use,' you must obtain permission from the copyright owner, in this instance Reuters News Service. For more information go to: http://www.law.cornell.edu/uscode/17/107.shtml ------------------------------ From: Lisa Minter Subject: EBay Uses Snail-Mail to Hook New Users Date: Thu, 25 Nov 2004 11:35:07 EST SAN FRANCISCO (Reuters) - Online marketplace and auctioneer eBay Inc. is using a decidedly low-tech retail tool to lure more Christmas shoppers -- a glossy, 32-page catalog. With the move, eBay joins Internet companies such as Amazon.com and RedEnvelope in using catalogs to reach customers they might not find with Web advertisements. Leading Web companies like eBay and Yahoo Inc. also are buying television and radio advertising spots in their effort to fuel growth. Among the featured items in eBay's holiday catalog are autographed copies of former U.S. President Bill Clinton's memoir "My Life," Ping golf clubs and giant Sesame Street Pez candy dispensers, as well as clothing, power tools and jewelry. Since the items offered by eBay sellers are constantly changing -- eBay has long been a favorite place to sell Christmas gifts that have missed the mark -- the catalog suggests how consumers can search for specific items on the site. In some cases, it shows where prices start. The company mailed "several million" holiday catalogs, said Michael Dearing, San Jose, California-based eBay's vice president of marketing and merchandising. *** FAIR USE NOTICE. This message contains copyrighted material the use of which has not been specifically authorized by the copyright owner. This Internet discussion group is making it available without profit to group members who have expressed a prior interest in receiving the included information in their efforts to advance the understanding of literary, educational, political, and economic issues, for non-profit research and educational purposes only. I believe that this constitutes a 'fair use' of the copyrighted material as provided for in section 107 of the U.S. Copyright Law. If you wish to use this copyrighted material for purposes of your own that go beyond 'fair use,' you must obtain permission from the copyright owner, in this instance, Reuters News Service.. For more information go to: http://www.law.cornell.edu/uscode/17/107.shtml ------------------------------ From: Dee Anthony Subject: Linksys RT31P2 VPN PPTP Port 1723 Problems Date: Thu, 25 Nov 2004 21:15:18 -0500 I also have the same problem with the Linksys Router not passing GRE properly. I get the 721 error as well. Did you find a solution? I contacted Linksys and they said they would look into it, but the router is being supported solely by Vonage. Dee Anthony ------------------------------ From: jimmy_please@yahoo.com (Jimmy) Subject: Lot of Questions on WML, WAP [Push]/HTTP, Cell-Carrier/Telco Date: 25 Nov 2004 19:28:06 -0800 - Does WML has post method like in HTML? So it's just really sending a HTTP request. - Or WAP [Push] only? Is WAP widely use and common-standard in the wireless world these days? - Whether is HTTP or WAP [Push], can I send binary? Or need encoded with Base64? - Does cell-carrier (or telco) accept HTTP? WAP [Push]? - If so, which one? Bell Mobility, AT&T Rogers Wireless, or Telus Mobility? - Does any of them (carriers) accept virtual SMS or MMS #? - Will they (carriers) forward the cell request as HTTP? Email? to a server (i.e. pre-defined IP ... say my little linux box at home?). - Will they (carriers) have public API (i.e. through HTTP or even Push-Proxy-Gateway) to accept request then forward request (may contain just text or even binary) back to cell phone? - Do any of them (carriers) have SMSC and/or MMSC to be access publicly? - Is there such as thing as WAP [Push] servlet? If so, do I need to implement one or there's already an open-source library (i.e. say in Java) I can use? Hope some of you experts out there can help me answer these questions. Jimmy-the-wireless-newbie ------------------------------ From: John McHarry Subject: Re: Telecom Bill Will Position Pennsylvania as National Leader Date: Fri, 26 Nov 2004 03:09:57 GMT Organization: EarthLink Inc. -- http://www.EarthLink.net Monty Solomon wrote: > Telecom Bill Will Position Pennsylvania as National Leader in > Advanced Telecommunications, Broadband Deployment > - Nov 24, 2004 03:57 PM (PR Newswire) > Facts Disprove Coalition's Misleading Claims > HARRISBURG, Pa., Nov. 24 /PRNewswire/ Well, PR Newswire and Verizon have always been reliable sources, so I guess that cinches it. ------------------------------ From: John McHarry Subject: Re: Dropping SBC For a VoIP Solution -- Vonage or Packet8 ?? Date: Fri, 26 Nov 2004 03:13:21 GMT Organization: EarthLink Inc. -- http://www.EarthLink.net Ringo Langly wrote: > I would've rather used Vonage, but like you Vonage isn't in my area > yet. I'll post some reviews and notes about it when I get it. Also > thanks for the firmware upgrade suggestion... does it have > instructions on how to do this? It is on the support section of their website. Quite easy to do. ------------------------------ Date: Thu, 25 Nov 2004 22:20:45 EST From: TELECOM Digest Editor Subject: Tis the Season Here we are between in the 'holiday season' once again, the period between Thanksgiving and Christmas/New Years. A message from our news feed today deals with the accelerated activity of phishers and spammers and scammers at this time of year, and it should be obvious to this group of readers at least, to be extremely careful about personal infrormation given out over the computer. As a general rule of thumb, **never** respond to any message you receive on the computer asking you to click on a link, or at least read the total link first and understand *where* it is going to wind up. The best way is to open a new browser window and from there go to wherever you were told to go for whatever 'maintainence' is purported to be needed on your account, etc. And it is not just computer transactions which need to be watched closely; in face to face, person to person transactions as well, between now and Christmas Eve, frauds and scams will come out all over the place. Ask almost anyone who works in the credit business; i.e. accepting point of sale transactions of credit cards, or 'back office' functions on credit cards. The amount of fraud is worse than ever between now and the new year. Especially please, use very good judgment on Christmas Eve, which is the biggest fraud transaction day in the year. I do not mean to sound like a Scrooge; just use extremely good judgment. *They* are hoping your sentiments for the season will rule instead of your good sense. On another topic: Beginning about two months ago, I started running a modest (and I hope tasteful collection of pertinent ads on the Digest web site, in an effort to *eventually* take the pressures off of readers who faithfully support me and the Digest financially. It has not worked all that well, as of now, in fact Google has not yet remitted anything thus far. (: I have always elected to keep it as a user supported forum, and for the most part keep it spam and virus free. I am *only* able to do this because of financial support from readers and advertisers here, and if you would rather not see these messages every month, then please pitch in and help now and then! Consider it sort of like public radio, which goes on for days at a time trying to raise money ... and maybe I should adopt the same system. Turn over the entire Digest once or twice a year to fund raising (entire issues, etc) and stop doing it when the budget for the year has been raised. But for now, I will stick with the present system of devoting a few messages at the end of each month to raising money for the Digest publication expenses, and presenting a small collection of advertisements on the web site. Out of 400-500 messages per month, in a spam, virus free environment, two or three (only) devoted to fund raising. You know who you are; please provide some help here financially. You can use Pay Pal to donate with a credit/debit card by going to our web site http://telecom-digest.org and at the bottom of the home page look for the PayPal 'donate' button. Or if you prefer, send a check or money order to Patrick Townson/TELECOM, Post Office Box 50, Independence, Kansas 67301-0050. The amount you send is entirely up to you. You know best how much you can afford and whether or not this Digest has any value for you, and I hope in a few months this message will not be needed at all, if Google 'comes through'. Thank you very much. Patrick Townson, Editor/Publisher TELECOM Digest ------------------------------ TELECOM Digest is an electronic journal devoted mostly but not exclusively to telecommunications topics. It is circulated anywhere there is email, in addition to various telecom forums on a variety of networks such as Compuserve and America On Line, Yahoo Groups, and other forums. It is also gatewayed to Usenet where it appears as the moderated newsgroup 'comp.dcom.telecom'. TELECOM Digest is a not-for-profit, mostly non-commercial educational service offered to the Internet by Patrick Townson. All the contents of the Digest are compilation-copyrighted. You may reprint articles in some other media on an occasional basis, but please attribute my work and that of the original author. Contact information: Patrick Townson/TELECOM Digest Post Office Box 50 Independence, KS 67301 Phone: 620-402-0134 Fax 1: 775-255-9970 Fax 2: 530-309-7234 Fax 3: 208-692-5145 Email: editor@telecom-digest.org Subscribe: telecom-subscribe@telecom-digest.org Unsubscribe:telecom-unsubscribe@telecom-digest.org This Digest is the oldest continuing e-journal about telecomm- unications on the Internet, having been founded in August, 1981 and published continuously since then. Our archives are available for your review/research. We believe we are the oldest e-zine/mailing list on the internet in any category! URL information: http://telecom-digest.org Anonymous FTP: mirror.lcs.mit.edu/telecom-archives/archives/ (or use our mirror site: ftp.epix.net/pub/telecom-archives) Email <==> FTP: telecom-archives@telecom-digest.org Send a simple, one line note to that automated address for a help file on how to use the automatic retrieval system for archives files. You can get desired files in email. ************************************************************************* * TELECOM Digest is partially funded by a grant from * * Judith Oppenheimer, President of ICB Inc. and purveyor of accurate * * 800 & Dot Com News, Intelligence, Analysis, and Consulting. * * http://ICBTollFree.com, http://1800TheExpert.com * * Views expressed herein should not be construed as representing * * views of Judith Oppenheimer or ICB Inc. * ************************************************************************* ICB Toll Free News. Contact information is not sold, rented or leased. One click a day feeds a person a meal. Go to http://www.thehungersite.com Copyright 2004 ICB, Inc. and TELECOM Digest. All rights reserved. Our attorney is Bill Levant, of Blue Bell, PA. ************************ DIRECTORY ASSISTANCE JUST 65 CENTS ONE OR TWO INQUIRIES CHARGED TO YOUR CREDIT CARD! REAL TIME, UP TO DATE! SPONSORED BY TELECOM DIGEST AND EASY411.COM SIGN UP AT http://www.easy411.com/telecomdigest ! ************************ --------------------------------------------------------------- Finally, the Digest is funded by gifts from generous readers such as yourself who provide funding in amounts deemed appropriate. Your help is important and appreciated. A suggested donation of fifty dollars per year per reader is considered appropriate. See our address above. Please make at least a single donation to cover the cost of processing your name to the mailing list. All opinions expressed herein are deemed to be those of the author. Any organizations listed are for identification purposes only and messages should not be considered any official expression by the organization. End of TELECOM Digest V23 #568 ****************************** From editor@telecom-digest.org Fri Nov 26 20:27:40 2004 Received: (from ptownson@localhost) by massis.lcs.mit.edu (8.11.6p3/8.11.6) id iAR1Rel27125; Fri, 26 Nov 2004 20:27:40 -0500 (EST) Date: Fri, 26 Nov 2004 20:27:40 -0500 (EST) From: editor@telecom-digest.org Message-Id: <200411270127.iAR1Rel27125@massis.lcs.mit.edu> X-Authentication-Warning: massis.lcs.mit.edu: ptownson set sender to editor@telecom-digest.org using -f To: ptownson Approved: patsnewlist Subject: TELECOM Digest V23 #569 TELECOM Digest Fri, 26 Nov 2004 20:26:00 EST Volume 23 : Issue 569 Inside This Issue: Editor: Patrick A. Townson Actor Must Pay $309,600 in Film Piracy Case (Lisa Minter) Next: TV Meets IP (Monty Solomon) TV's Spectrum Showdown (Monty Solomon) Wireless Wish List (Monty Solomon) Routing Problems To the Cayman Islands (Paul Barnes) World's First Book on Professional Data Recovery Programming (T. Tyagi) Re: What Wal-Mart Knows About Customers' Habits (Robert Bonomi) Re: 'Frontline' Files an Eye-Opening Credit Report (Andrew) Re: Trial Shows How Spammers Operate (Scott Dorsey) Re: How Do I Learn an Unknown Number? (Tony P.) Holidays Looking Merry for Web Retailers (Lisa Minter) Kazaa Offers Unlimited Free Internet Phone Calls (Lisa Minter) FCC Watching SBC Phone Charges to VOIP Carriers (Lisa Minter) All contents here are copyrighted by Patrick Townson and the individual writers/correspondents. Articles may be used in other journals or newsgroups, provided the writer's name and the Digest are included in the fair use quote. By using -any name or email address- included herein for -any- reason other than responding to an article herein, you agree to pay a hundred dollars to the recipients of the email. =========================== Addresses herein are not to be added to any mailing list, nor to be sold or given away without explicit written consent. Chain letters, viruses, porn, spam, and miscellaneous junk are definitely unwelcome. We must fight spam for the same reason we fight crime: not because we are naive enough to believe that we will ever stamp it out, but because we do not want the kind of world that results when no one stands against crime. Geoffrey Welsh =========================== See the bottom of this issue for subscription and archive details and the name of our lawyer; other stuff of interest. ---------------------------------------------------------------------- From: Lisa Minter Subject: Actor Must Pay $309,600 in Film Piracy Case Date: Fri, 26 Nov 2004 19:02:29 EST LOS ANGELES (Hollywood Reporter) - Warner Bros. has secured a $309,600 judgment against an actor for allegedly making promotional "screener" copies of "The Last Samurai" and "Mystic River" available for bootleg DVD copying and unauthorized Internet trading, the studio said Tuesday. Studio officials say Carmine Caridi, a former recurring actor on "NYPD Blue," has refused to respond to their civil suit for copyright infringement, forcing them to ask the U.S. District Court in Los Angeles to enter a default judgment of $150,000 per film and $9,600 in attorney fees. Judge Stephen Wilson granted that request, adding that the defendant's conduct was "particularly egregious" because of the intentional and deliberate nature of the infringement. Caridi and co-defendant Russell Sprague were caught because the screeners were individually watermarked for each recipient. "Judge Wilson's award and comments clearly show that due to the viral nature of the Internet, even one illegally used copy of a film can cause significant financial damage," said Darcy Antonellis, senior vp worldwide anti-piracy operations at Warner Bros. Entertainment. "We hope that the court's award against Mr. Caridi as well as the criminal sentence to be handed down against Sprague, whose actions were equally destructive, will prove a deterrent against the stealing of intellectual property." Caridi could not be reached for comment Tuesday, and studio officials acknowledge that it may be difficult to collect the judgment against him. Caridi's credits include his role as Det. Vince Gotelli on ABC's "NYPD Blue." For his part, Sprague was charged with in federal court with violating the Digital Millennium Copyright Act leading him to plead guilty March 23. His sentencing is pending, and a civil suit could follow. According to Warner Bros., Caridi, as a member of the Academy of Motion Picture Arts & Sciences, signed an agreement before he received the 2003 awards season screeners promising not to circulate them. It is believed that he immediately sent the VHS screeners to Sprague in Homewood, Ill., where they were copied onto DVD and converted to digital files that were posted on the Internet. The Academy's board of governors expelled Caridi on Feb. 3 for violating the agreement. *** FAIR USE NOTICE. This message contains copyrighted material the use of which has not been specifically authorized by the copyright owner. This Internet discussion group is making it available without profit to group members who have expressed a prior interest in receiving the included information in their efforts to advance the understanding of literary, educational, political, and economic issues, for non-profit research and educational purposes only. I believe that this constitutes a 'fair use' of the copyrighted material as provided for in section 107 of the U.S. Copyright Law. If you wish to use this copyrighted material for purposes of your own that go beyond 'fair use,' you must obtain permission from the copyright owner, in this instance, Reuters News Service/Hollywood Reporter.. For more information go to: http://www.law.cornell.edu/uscode/17/107.shtml ------------------------------ Date: Fri, 26 Nov 2004 17:18:51 -0500 From: Monty Solomon Subject: Next: TV Meets IP SPECIAL REPORT: TV, TODAY AND TOMORROW Internet technologies promise to soon take couch potatoes to worlds far beyond TiVo. Even phone companies could benefit big-time Just a few years ago, the fine art of watching TV seemed unlikely to change much. You watched programs when the networks told you to watch them. Maybe you taped them on a videocassette recorder. Either way, your choices were limited. Then along came the TiVo (TIVO ) digital video recorder, which as its 2 million loyal customers will tell you, added more than a little convenience to the coach potato's world. Turns out, TiVo was just the start. A new wave of TV-related innovation called IP-TV is just starting to reach consumers. Just as the service known as voice over Internet protocol is poised to revolutionize the phone business by offering a low-cost Internet alternative to traditional phone service, IP-TV could bring Internet-style interactivity and flexibility to your TV set. It won't happen overnight, of course. But over the next decade, the long-hyped notion of "video-on-demand" could become commonplace, allowing consumers to watch what they want, when they want to. They'll be able to control their IP-TV service remotely through a PC or a cell phone. And they'll be able to personalize their content, whether they want to watch the local high school football game or home movies. http://www.businessweek.com/technology/content/nov2004/tc20041123_3012_tc184.htm ------------------------------ Date: Fri, 26 Nov 2004 17:20:24 -0500 From: Monty Solomon Subject: TV's Spectrum Showdown SPECIAL REPORT: TV, TODAY AND TOMORROW In a deal originally made in 1996, broadcasters may soon be forced to return airwaves now used to transmit analog signals For nearly a decade, the nation's 1,700 TV stations have been promising to broadcast crystal-clear digital signals to viewers across the country. But somehow, rushing toward that end never seemed to be entirely in their best interest. Those promises go back to a deal broadcasters made with the federal government under the 1996 Telecommunications Act and a follow-up congressional bill a year later. Broadcasters received free electronic airwaves -- which are technically owned by the public and controlled by the federal government -- for digital transmissions. In return, they had to give back the airwaves they now use for their old analog broadcasts, which had been doled out over several decades. But they didn't have to return it until 85% of U.S. households receive digital signals or the year 2006, whichever came later. Now patience is running out for the broadcasters to turn in that valuable piece of the sky. The year 2006 is just around the corner, and carriers are now sending digital signals that reach 85% of households in just about all of the nation's 210 TV markets (even though not all those households have digital-ready TVs). http://www.businessweek.com/technology/content/nov2004/tc20041123_3981_tc184.htm ------------------------------ Date: Fri, 26 Nov 2004 18:05:52 -0500 From: Monty Solomon Subject: Wireless Wish List By BART ZIEGLER WHETHER YOU'RE LOOKING to find the perfect gift for your favorite keyboard jockey, or just indulging in a little extracurricular shopping for yourself, the hottest gear this season is all about cutting the cord. The new wireless gadgets include keyboards and mice, printers and headphones - even wireless digital music machines that play songs stored on a PC through a home stereo. The first thing you'll need is a working knowledge of the two basic wireless technologies, Wi-Fi and Bluetooth, so you can choose the right flavor of wirelessness, or build on what you already have in place. You can certainly mix these two technologies in the same house, but a Wi-Fi gadget can't talk to a Bluetooth one. A Wi-Fi setup is a true wireless network whose signal covers an entire house, inside and out. It enables users to wander from an upstairs bedroom to the downstairs kitchen to the outdoor patio with a Wi-Fi-equipped laptop, all the while enjoying high-speed Internet access transmitted via a radio signal. If you don't already have a Wi-Fi network at home, installation involves buying a wireless router from such companies as Netgear, Belkin or Linksys, then hooking it up to a DSL or cable modem. Each computer you want to connect to the network needs a Wi-Fi card or built-in Wi-Fi capability - many new laptops come already equipped. Routers go for $80 or more, and PC cards can be had for as little as $30, a perfect gift combo. Bluetooth, by contrast, is a shorter-range technology. It's aimed mostly at wirelessly linking one device directly to another, such as connecting a PDA or cell phone to a PC to synchronize address books and to-do lists. Bluetooth also can be used to link a wireless headset to a cell phone, or to connect a Palm or PocketPC to a printer. Generally speaking, the Bluetooth devices you're connecting must be within 30 feet of each other, though the signal does penetrate most walls. You can add Bluetooth to a laptop computer with a special card that fits into the PC card slot, such as 3Com's Wireless Bluetooth PC Card, which goes for about $100. Or you could use an even smaller, cheaper device that is tinier than a box of matches and that inserts into a computer's USB port. One to consider is Belkin's Bluetooth Adapter, which lists for $60. These should work with most any Windows-based computer. Another way to add Bluetooth to a Windows desktop computer is with what's called a Bluetooth hub. This small device plugs into the back of a PC, then serves as a central access point for various Bluetooth-equipped gadgets. For Apple users, you can convert a Macintosh to Bluetooth by buying D-Link's DBT-120 Bluetooth adapter ($40), which plugs into the USB port. Once you've got the basics in place, here are some great new wireless gadgets to enhance your cordless lifestyle. http://ptech.wsj.com/archive/report-200411.html ------------------------------ From: Paul Barnes Subject: Routing Problems To the Cayman Islands Date: 26 Nov 2004 05:45:31 -0800 Organization: Newsguy News Service [http://newsguy.com] Hi All: I work for Cable and Wireless in the Caribbean, and we have received several complaints that in the past 3-4 weeks, that persons in many parts of the world (including the US and Canada) who try to call cellphone NXX codes in the Cayman Islands have been experiencing difficulties. Some of the experiences received when placing the calls are dead air, fast busies, reorder tones, pretty much everything else besides a completed call. Note that the cellular infrastructure is back on its feet after the passage of Hurricane Ivan in September, RF problems are not contributing to this issue. We have arranged for test calls to be made to the Cayman cellphone NXX ranges from all of the major Tier 1 international carriers with whom C&W has agreements to bring traffic into the region: ATT, IDT, MCI, Sprint, BT, Teleglobe and CWC. All of these test calls were successful. We think that these problems may have resulted from some least-cost routing arrangement that a tier 2 or 3 carrier is engaged in. C&W has no direct relationships with any such carriers. I was hoping that someone in the group might be able to offer some advice on how we could proceed to get some help in fixing this routing problem. I have listed below some test Cayman cellular numbers, if any one in the group would be so good as to dial these numbers and let me know if they were successful in reach the party in Cayman, I would appreciate it. Cayman Islands NPA, 345 (part of the North American Numbering plan) Test numbers: 345 516 0810 345 525 0006 345 916 2850 345 914 0303 Thanks in advance for any feedback, advice, ideas, etc. Regards, Paul Barnes Manager, Technology & Operations Cable & Wireless Carrier Services Tel: 246-292-1297 Email: paul.r.barnes@cw.com ------------------------------ From: taruntyagiji@yahoo.com (Author Tarun Tyagi) Subject: World's First Book on Professional Data Recovery Programming Date: 26 Nov 2004 09:13:19 -0800 Organization: http://groups.google.com Hi! I am glad to introduce World's First Book on Professional Data Recovery Programming. Book also Includes a FREE CD, which contains complete Source Codes of all the software/Programs described within the book and may interesting tools You can see the contents of the book and order Online on following link: http://www.DataDoctor.biz/author.htm The Details of the Book are as follows: Title of the book: "Data Recovery with & without Programming" Author of the book: Tarun Tyagi Publishers of the book: BPB Publications, New Delhi, India Number of Pages: 540 Size: (9.5 x 7.5 x 1.0) Inches ISBN: 81-7656-922-4 Price: $ 69.00 (Including Shipping Charge, Cost of Book and Other expenses) Enjoy Reading!! Regards, Tarun Tyagi J-110, Patel Nagar - 1, Ghaziabad (U.P.), India -201001 Cell: (+91)9868337762 http://www.DataDoctor.Biz ------------------------------ Organization: Robert Bonomi Consulting Subject: Re: What Wal-Mart Knows About Customers' Habits From: bonomi@host122.r-bonomi.com (Robert Bonomi) Date: Fri, 26 Nov 2004 07:18:18 +0000 In article , DevilsPGD wrote: > In message > bonomi@host122.r-bonomi.com (Robert Bonomi) wrote: >>> Sure. However, since the customer can request cash back it's another >>> way to steal. The cashier fakes problems scanning an item, punches in >>> the amount manually as cash, and gives the customer the item. >>> The customer isn't over charged, so has no reason to complain. >>> The cashier's till is now over -- Now she just needs to grab the cash >>> at some point during the transaction. >> No, the till is _not_ over. Punching in the amount as 'cash due' >> instead of scanning the item, is no different than scanning the item >> itself, as far as the cash balance in the till goes. The *only* >> difference is in the store 'inventory', where the proper item was >> -not- deducted from the count. > I wasn't clear enough ... Not "Punches the amount as cash from the > customer", I meant "punches in a cash back request for the same > amount" AH. Of course, almost all even semi-current computerized cash-register implementations _will_not_ let you do that, *during* charged item entry. It has to be done at the end of the transaction. *after* the total has been calculated/displayed, _and_ the 'payment type' has been selected. And, a 'cash back' request is valid _only_ on a credit/debit/ATM card transaction. There is no need for it, on a 'cash' or 'check' transaction, because the 'cash back' is automatic, based on the over-payment recorded. And, on the 'card' transactions, 'cash back' is almost always itemized separately on the actual 'card transaction' (_not_ the cash-register) receipt. Just *one* of the reasons you get that _second_ piece of paper, that is the 'carbon' from the one you _signed_. Also, most 'newer' register systems won't do a 'cash back' request, *at*all*, unless the _customer_ keys in the amount on the keypad facing _them_. > In essence a cash back request means the customer is purchasing cash > from the till. This gets the cash out of the till (and into the > cashier's pocket), plus of course it screws up inventory. > Another twist would be to activate a $20 gift card instead of ringing > up a purchase of just over $20. This would be more likely to get > caught though, since you then have to spend the gift card at some > point. Not terribly practical. Requires (a) bypassing the scanner with the $20 item, (b) having the 'unregistered' card _in_hand_ at the opportune moment, (c) *scanning* (or swiping) the card, *and* making the appropriate entries on the register keyboard. >> [TELECOM Digest Editor's Note: You make it sound as though local >> acceptance of local C of C gift certificates is going to be a major, >> massive processing operation in a small town like ours. You make it >> sound as though joining the local C of C in a small town to show >> support of other community merchants and share tips, ideas, etc is >> going to cause a major outlay for Walmart. You make it sound as though >> any modicum of customer service and goodwill is going to have an >> effect on their 'lower prices'. > Unfortunately doing anything unique / "local" will probably cost more > money in the bureaucracy of accounting for the C of C gift > certificates then they could possibly bring in. Exactly. The 'hard dollar' cost of that 'special handling' is far higher than the possible 'intangible' good will generated. >> Walmart does have its own gift 'certificates' in the form of prepaid >> plastic credit cards, branded in their own name, in the 6011 series >> of numbers. Those are processed like credit card sales at the cash >> register, and must cost them something to process. > As a general rule those cards make money due to administration fees > that let Walmart keep the leftover money if a card gets lost or > destroyed, or otherwise goes unused. Plus, like all gift certificate > type programs, it gets the money out of the customer's hand sooner, > which means Walmart can invest the money now. > The cost to manage the cards shouldn't be substantial. There is a NON-TRIVIAL, *one-time*, already 'sunk', cost for the programming to support in-house-issued gift cards. Spread across _all_ the stores, and _all_ the gift cards sold. Over the entire lifetime of the software. On a 'per card' basis, that cost is 'close enough' to zero, as to not matter. The 'labor' for handling the in-house card, when presented, is, for all practical purposes, equivalent to that required for any other form of payment. No additional burden there. There is a bit of a cost in querying/updating the gift card database. It is, however, miniscule. The cost of purchasing the disk storage for say, 100 *million* cards is on the order of $50. Per card, this is _way_ down in the noise -- even if the system is being used at only, say =one=percent= of capacity. Unlike actual _paper_, the 'gift cards' are practically free of cost to the store. [TELECOM Digest Editor's Note: I did not realize it was so expensive and impractical for Walmart to offer any customer service. It makes me glad I did not stop in this afternoon (Friday) to do any shopping after my visit to my hairdresser. You see, I forgot to take along my cell phone, so I would have had to impose on Bob Donaldson or one of his customer service people to call the cab to come pick me up. I would have hated to put them to that extra expense. PAT] ------------------------------ From: Andrew Subject: Re: 'Frontline' Files an Eye-Opening Credit Report Date: Fri, 26 Nov 2004 13:54:32 UTC Organization: North Avenue Trade School Monty Solomon wrote: > Secret History of the Credit Card > http://www.pbs.org/wgbh/pages/frontline/shows/credit/ Very interesting. Both Discover and Citbank seem to be using two different techniques desribed in the article to try to screw me. One way the issuers screw cardholders is by not reporting the cardholders' credit limit to the reporting agencies. This is an intentional attempt to keep your FICO score low to prevent other card issuers from poaching you. A big part of your fico score is your debt to credit limit ratio. Equifax/Experian/Transunion substitute your historical higest balance for purposes of calculating your debt/credit limit ratio when the card issuers withhold your credit limit. Discover does not report my $11k credit limit --my credit report just shows my high balance of $2400 instead. A review of my credit report also show that Citibank is pulling my credit report each and every month. This is no doubt an attempt to take advantage of 'universal fault', i.e. use a late car payment or utility payment as an excuse to raise your credit card rate even if your credit card payment history is spotless. I have never ever carried a balance on any of my credit cards, so in my case, it's rather pointless of them to try to dig up a late payment to one of my other creditors. A punitive credit card rate would not affect me. I'm going to have to try to catch a rerun of the NYT/Frontline documentary. Andrew Olechny | s/nats/gatech/g | Atlanta, Ga USA ------------------------------ From: kludge@panix.com (Scott Dorsey) Subject: Re: Trial Shows How Spammers Operate Date: 26 Nov 2004 13:49:29 -0500 Organization: Former users of Netcom shell (1989-2000) Dan Lanciani wrote: > kludge@panix.com (Scott Dorsey) wrote: >> You _might_ do a lot better just to extract the first Received: line from >> the header and send a complaint to wherever that came from. For example, >> take the following procmail rule: >> # Comcast dynamic addresses >> :0 >> |* ? /usr/local/bin/formail -xReceived: -uReceived: | grep >> client.comcast.net >> |cat $HOME/spam - | Mail -s "Your Spam" abuse@comcast.net >> We can basically be sure that if something comes from a dynamically >> allocated address on comcast, that it's spam from a zombie machine, so >> the false positive rate on this is basically zero. Real mail from >> comcast customers comes from the comcast mail server. > I think that that would be an extremely bad idea for several reasons. > First, it would fail to fulfill the primary purpose of responding: to > inform false positives that an error has been made. No, it informs the ISP from which the message was sent that the error has been made. In most cases today, this would be the ISP that provides service to the zombie machine that is infected with a spam-propagating worm. In the rest of the cases, it would probably be the ISP providing service to the spammer. Only in the case of a spammer running a direct service themselves would mail to the contact addresses of the site in the first received line actually go to the spammer. The last received: line can be believed. The from: lines cannot be believed, ever. In the case of the rule I gave, it will send a message to comcast's abuse address whenever mail sent from a dynamically-allocated comcast address arrives. There is NO REASON for anyone on a dynamically-allocated block to be sending mail directly; mail sent from Comcast users should go through their mail server and not from their direct address. So the only mail you will ever get from these blocks will be spam, mostly from zombie machines. > Almost as important, it would require me to automatically create > _outbound_ SMTP connections as a matter of course. That really is > unsolicited email and, while I don't agree that it is actually "spam", > it would provide the C/R haters ammunition to have my mail server > blacklisted. No, it might cause the abuse desks at ISPs to start blacklisting you. Hell, half of the abuse desks today just throw away all the incoming mail anyway, I suspect. But it will do nothing to offend the "C/R haters" because it's not a C/R confirmation. > No, really, it won't make me feel better. :) I try to "feel" as little > as possible about spam. I would feel very bad if I incorrectly > reported someone for spamming, though. IMHO, too much "feeling" about > spam -- keeping the War on Spam raging -- is a big part of the > problem. There is a lot of empire building going on with hundreds of > blacklists trying to punish various behaviors (apparently including in > some cases the behavior of wanting to fight spam differently from the > list's owner) yet ultimately doing little to prevent the increase of > spam (let alone reduce it). This worries me in the same way that the > anti-virus companies' dependence on the virus worries me. The problem is the explosive growth of the network, and the consequent incompetence of most of the larger backbone sites, which are run by people who do not understand the nature of the early internet. I suspect that this will settle down in the US, but as the net expands throughout the industrializing nations, it's just going to get worse. But C/R is a really bad idea. Trust me on this one. C/R is not fighting spam, it's just making the problem worse, because it's sending a huge number of messages to people who are unrelated to the issue. That's bad, and it is just going to piss people off. >> If every single one of us here went and injured a single spammer, the >> spam problem would be more or less gone. In fact, if one person beat >> Ralsky up with a baseball bat, I think we'd all see about a 50% drop >> in spam. > Yes, it seems to be ok to propose totally absurd solutions since there > is little danger of their being implemented. When spam was new, that sort of thing was being implemented all the time. The guys who spraypainted "SPAMMER" on the front door at uunet ... the guys who set Jeff Slaton's car on fire. These are the sort of behaviours that used to be common ways of dealing with spamming, and it's about the only sort of thing that the spammers really understand. > Oh, and I also understand the argument about zombies using their > host's legitimate relay. (a) I don't see a lot of that kind of > traffic and (b) I'm not convinced that I owe such users (whose machine > would be, after all, spamming me) the duty to silently absorb their > spam. They are not quite the same as the competely innocent victims > or forgery. Check the headers. You will find that 90% of the spam you receive today is being routed through zombie machines. Blocking dynamic addresses cuts down the vast majority of that. > Anyway, as I said the the other correspondent in this thread, please > feel free to have the last word. I realize that this is a religious > issue and could be debated forever. However, I ask that you not > assume that I haven't done some fairly extensive analysis before > implementing my solution. Does that include looking at breakdowns of where the spam comes from? Not where the From: field says it comes from, but where it actually comes from? --scott "C'est un Nagra. C'est suisse, et tres, tres precis." [TELECOM Digest Editor's Note: A question on spam for anyone who wishes to answer: I have been allowing my computers to stay turned on all the time, although there is always 8-10 hours per day (or overnight actually) when I am not using one or more of them. My assumption is because I run so many protective things on them, (Spybot, AVG 6.0, Ad-Aware, Mail Washer, etc) and the 'bots' of these things do their work during the night while I am asleep so I do not have to waste time waiting for the bots to run during the day, that I am safe, and of course there is a firewall router on line as well. But a couple people have independently stated that I should turn all computers off when not actually sitting here to supervise them. And on a couple occassions I have seen the disk drive on my Linux computer (which also has Win 2000 on it) spinning for relatively long periods of time when the machine was otherwise idle or not being used. But I would hate to think I was being used as a spam sender overnight when I was not here to watch over things. What are your thoughts? I know I have recieved from many of you total garbage things which implies to me that either your own computer has been compromised or at least your email address has been forged. Do any of you get things allegedly from me which is garbage that I 'sent' you? Should I turn the system completely off when I am asleep/not home? PAT] ------------------------------ From: Tony P. Subject: Re: How Do I Learn an Unknown Number? Organization: ATCC Date: Fri, 26 Nov 2004 17:43:21 -0500 In article , billb@ftldesign.com says: > Andrew Bell wrote: >> Nathan Strom wrote: >>> If there's a dialtone on the line, hook up a phone and try >>> calling 1-888-902-9998. It should read back the number of the >>> calling phone. >> It seems to read back the caller ID info presented, not the ANI. >> I tried it from behind a PBX and got my DID number back. > Googling on 1-888-902-9998 finds an interesting discussion thread: > http://www.tek-tips.com/viewthread.cfm?qid=583069 > which includes these useful notes: > "Also check out 888-294-9681 - it gives you the voice circuit type and > the number... will even do callback at the end of the call to confirm > that it is working fine." That one also returns CLID and not ANI. > and > "Here is a nation wide ANI # from MCI 1-800-444-4444" This one also returns CLID. Come to think of it, maybe it's something funky that Vonage is doing though. They do set the CLID and ANI so that could be it. Tony ------------------------------ From: Lisa Minter Subject: Holidays Looking Merry for Web Retailers Date: Fri, 26 Nov 2004 18:59:10 EST SAN FRANCISCO (Reuters) - It's shaping up to be a very merry holiday season for online retailers. Web shopping got off and running for the busiest season of the year with traffic up 60 percent for the week ended Nov. 14 from the prior seven-day period, Nielsen//NetRatings said on Tuesday. The share of Internet traffic going to shopping sites already has surpassed last year's high, set on Thanksgiving Day, Internet traffic monitoring company Hitwise said. "As Black Friday approaches, shoppers are flocking online to research holiday gifts, comparison shop, and look at the vast array of products available," said Heather Dougherty, senior retail analyst at Nielsen//NetRatings. Black Friday, the day after the Thursday's U.S. Thanksgiving holiday, is traditionally the biggest shopping day of the year. U.S. consumers are expected to spend $16.7 billion online during the holiday months of November and December, an increase of 29 percent from the year-earlier period, according to research firm eMarketer. Meanwhile, total U.S. holiday retail sales are seen rising 4.5 percent to $219.9 billion, according to the National Retail Federation. "Online shopping appears to be occurring earlier and in greater force than last year," said Bill Tancer, vice president of research at Hitwise. "If last year is any indication, we're likely to see weekly shopping levels increase with a peak roughly a week before Christmas," Tancer said. Nielsen//NetRatings, an Internet audience research firm, which unveiled its sixth annual Holiday eShopping Index on Tuesday, said home and garden, books/music/video, and toys and video games led Web shopping traffic growth. The home and garden category saw weekly traffic soar 88 percent, as sites run by Home Depot Inc. and Pottery Barn saw traffic increases of 159 percent and 97 percent, respectively. Visits to books/music/video sites were up 87 percent, fueled in part by a 233 percent increase in visits to No. 2 online bookseller barnesandnoble.com. The toys and video games category was up 85 percent as traffic to KBToys.com skyrocketed 276 percent and EBgames.com soared 210 percent. Apparel, another key category for holiday sales where retailers garner a bulk of annual sales, saw a 75 percent increase as the Gap Inc.'s online traffic rose 245 percent and Lands' End increased 68 percent. Shopping comparison/portals rounded out the five fastest growing categories in the index with a 73 percent increase. Within the category, Yahoo Shopping's traffic grew 174 percent while MySimon's jumped 133 percent. Hitwise said that the 13 leading comparison-shopping sites claimed 5 percent of all shopping visits last week. Half of that traffic come directly from major search engines and directories like Google and Yahoo Search. Tancer said that marked "a new era in online shopping." "Users are becoming more sophisticated in their online purchase behaviors, clearly demonstrating the willingness to use comparison-shopping sites to find the best product at the best price," he said. The most-visited comparison-shopping sites last week were Yahoo Shopping, Shopzilla's BizRate.com and newly public Shopping.com, according to Hitwise. *** FAIR USE NOTICE. This message contains copyrighted material the use of which has not been specifically authorized by the copyright owner. This Internet discussion group is making it available without profit to group members who have expressed a prior interest in receiving the included information in their efforts to advance the understanding of literary, educational, political, and economic issues, for non-profit research and educational purposes only. I believe that this constitutes a 'fair use' of the copyrighted material as provided for in section 107 of the U.S. Copyright Law. If you wish to use this copyrighted material for purposes of your own that go beyond 'fair use,' you must obtain permission from the copyright owner, in this instance, Reuters News Service. For more information go to: http://www.law.cornell.edu/uscode/17/107.shtml ------------------------------ From: Lisa Minter Subject: Kazaa Offers Unlimited Free Internet Phone Calls Date: Fri, 26 Nov 2004 19:01:04 EST LOS ANGELES (Reuters) - Sharman Networks Ltd., distributor of the Kazaa file-sharing software, on Monday launched its latest version which enables users to make free online calls anywhere in the world. Kazaa v3.0 includes the integration of Internet telephony software from Skype Technologies SA and also offers advanced search capabilities and a free weblog trial. Skype, headquartered in Luxembourg, is the newest venture of Niklas Zennstrom and Janus Friis, co-founders of Kazaa and Altnet, a secure peer-to-peer network. *** FAIR USE NOTICE. This message contains copyrighted material the use of which has not been specifically authorized by the copyright owner. This Internet discussion group is making it available without profit to group members who have expressed a prior interest in receiving the included information in their efforts to advance the understanding of literary, educational, political, and economic issues, for non-profit research and educational purposes only. I believe that this constitutes a 'fair use' of the copyrighted material as provided for in section 107 of the U.S. Copyright Law. If you wish to use this copyrighted material for purposes of your own that go beyond 'fair use,' you must obtain permission from the copyright owner, in this instance, Reuters News Service. For more information go to: http://www.law.cornell.edu/uscode/17/107.shtml ------------------------------ From: Lisa Minter Date: Fri, 26 Nov 2004 18:09:57 -0500 Subject: FCC Watching SBC Web Phone Charge http://money.cnn.com/2004/11/26/news/fortune500/sbc_fcc.reut/ Firm's new connection charge for calls made over the Internet is being watched, Powell says. WASHINGTON (Reuters) - SBC Communications Inc.'s new connection charge for calls made over the Internet is being watched, Federal Communications Commission Chairman Michael Powell said Friday. Powell said SBC's "TIPToP" plan shouldn't be used to force higher connection charges on voice-over-Internet protocol (VoIP) services or to discriminate against SBC competitors. "Should we conclude that this tariff is being used to justify the imposition of traditional tariffed access charges on VoIP providers or to discriminate against SBC's competitors, the commission will take appropriate action ... ," Powell said in a statement. Full story at: http://money.cnn.com/2004/11/26/news/fortune500/sbc_fcc.reut/ ------------------------------ TELECOM Digest is an electronic journal devoted mostly but not exclusively to telecommunications topics. It is circulated anywhere there is email, in addition to various telecom forums on a variety of networks such as Compuserve and America On Line, Yahoo Groups, and other forums. It is also gatewayed to Usenet where it appears as the moderated newsgroup 'comp.dcom.telecom'. TELECOM Digest is a not-for-profit, mostly non-commercial educational service offered to the Internet by Patrick Townson. All the contents of the Digest are compilation-copyrighted. You may reprint articles in some other media on an occasional basis, but please attribute my work and that of the original author. Contact information: Patrick Townson/TELECOM Digest Post Office Box 50 Independence, KS 67301 Phone: 620-402-0134 Fax 1: 775-255-9970 Fax 2: 530-309-7234 Fax 3: 208-692-5145 Email: editor@telecom-digest.org Subscribe: telecom-subscribe@telecom-digest.org Unsubscribe:telecom-unsubscribe@telecom-digest.org This Digest is the oldest continuing e-journal about telecomm- unications on the Internet, having been founded in August, 1981 and published continuously since then. Our archives are available for your review/research. We believe we are the oldest e-zine/mailing list on the internet in any category! URL information: http://telecom-digest.org Anonymous FTP: mirror.lcs.mit.edu/telecom-archives/archives/ (or use our mirror site: ftp.epix.net/pub/telecom-archives) Email <==> FTP: telecom-archives@telecom-digest.org Send a simple, one line note to that automated address for a help file on how to use the automatic retrieval system for archives files. You can get desired files in email. ************************************************************************* * TELECOM Digest is partially funded by a grant from * * Judith Oppenheimer, President of ICB Inc. and purveyor of accurate * * 800 & Dot Com News, Intelligence, Analysis, and Consulting. * * http://ICBTollFree.com, http://1800TheExpert.com * * Views expressed herein should not be construed as representing * * views of Judith Oppenheimer or ICB Inc. * ************************************************************************* ICB Toll Free News. Contact information is not sold, rented or leased. One click a day feeds a person a meal. Go to http://www.thehungersite.com Copyright 2004 ICB, Inc. and TELECOM Digest. All rights reserved. Our attorney is Bill Levant, of Blue Bell, PA. ************************ DIRECTORY ASSISTANCE JUST 65 CENTS ONE OR TWO INQUIRIES CHARGED TO YOUR CREDIT CARD! REAL TIME, UP TO DATE! SPONSORED BY TELECOM DIGEST AND EASY411.COM SIGN UP AT http://www.easy411.com/telecomdigest ! ************************ --------------------------------------------------------------- Finally, the Digest is funded by gifts from generous readers such as yourself who provide funding in amounts deemed appropriate. Your help is important and appreciated. A suggested donation of fifty dollars per year per reader is considered appropriate. See our address above. Please make at least a single donation to cover the cost of processing your name to the mailing list. All opinions expressed herein are deemed to be those of the author. Any organizations listed are for identification purposes only and messages should not be considered any official expression by the organization. End of TELECOM Digest V23 #569 ****************************** From editor@telecom-digest.org Sat Nov 27 13:09:49 2004 Received: (from ptownson@localhost) by massis.lcs.mit.edu (8.11.6p3/8.11.6) id iARI9nX06015; Sat, 27 Nov 2004 13:09:49 -0500 (EST) Date: Sat, 27 Nov 2004 13:09:49 -0500 (EST) From: editor@telecom-digest.org Message-Id: <200411271809.iARI9nX06015@massis.lcs.mit.edu> X-Authentication-Warning: massis.lcs.mit.edu: ptownson set sender to editor@telecom-digest.org using -f To: ptownson Approved: patsnewlist Subject: TELECOM Digest V23 #570 TELECOM Digest Sat, 27 Nov 2004 13:10:00 EST Volume 23 : Issue 570 Inside This Issue: Editor: Patrick A. Townson FCC Chairman Powell Issues Statement On SBC's Tiptop Service (L. Minter) An Explosive Year For VOIP (Lisa Minter) Re: Trial Shows How Spammers Operate (Dave Garland) Re: Trial Shows How Spammers Operate (jdj) Re: Dropping SBC For a VoIP Solution - Vonage or Packet8? (charlie3) Re: FCC Watching SBC Web Phone Charge (Scott V) Re: 'Frontline' Files an Eye-Opening Credit Report (DevilsPGD) Re: Routing Problems To the Cayman Islands (Budwich) Last Laugh! Sayings from Chairman Dubya Bush (A Friend) All contents here are copyrighted by Patrick Townson and the individual writers/correspondents. Articles may be used in other journals or newsgroups, provided the writer's name and the Digest are included in the fair use quote. By using -any name or email address- included herein for -any- reason other than responding to an article herein, you agree to pay a hundred dollars to the recipients of the email. =========================== Addresses herein are not to be added to any mailing list, nor to be sold or given away without explicit written consent. Chain letters, viruses, porn, spam, and miscellaneous junk are definitely unwelcome. We must fight spam for the same reason we fight crime: not because we are naive enough to believe that we will ever stamp it out, but because we do not want the kind of world that results when no one stands against crime. Geoffrey Welsh =========================== See the bottom of this issue for subscription and archive details and the name of our lawyer; other stuff of interest. ---------------------------------------------------------------------- From: Lisa Minter Date: Fri, 26 Nov 2004 18:20:02 -0500 Subject: FCC Chairman Powell Issues Statement On SBC's Tiptop Service http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DOC-254681A1.pdf NEWS Federal Communications Commission 445 12th Street, S.W. Washington, D. C. 20554 This is an unofficial announcement of Commission action. Release of the full text of a Commission order constitutes official action. See MCI v. FCC. 515 F 2d 385 (D.C. Circ 1974). Internet: http://www.fcc.gov FOR IMMEDIATE RELEASE November 26, 2004 NEWS MEDIA CONTACTS Richard Diamond: 202-418-0513 Mark Wigfield: 202-418-0253 CHAIRMAN POWELL ISSUES STATEMENT ON SBC's TIPToP SERVICE FCC Chairman Michael K. Powell issued the following statement concerning SBC's new interstate connectivity service, known as TIPToP. "SBC's interstate tariff for TIPToP service comes at time when VoIP services are continuing to grab consumer attention by offering more choice, lower prices, greater value, and enhanced features. I am committed to ensuring that this Commission avoids any action that might slow the IP-services revolution. "Against this backdrop, the Commission, state utility commissions, and the courts all are considering the question of whether legacy access charges should apply to VoIP services. SBC's tariff makes clear that TIPToP is not a mandatory offering and VoIP providers may continue to utilize alternatives to exchange their traffic. Should we conclude that this tariff is being used to justify the imposition of traditional tariffed access charges on VoIP providers or to discriminate against SBC's competitors, the Commission will take appropriate action including, but not limited to, initiating an investigation of SBC's interstate tariff and any other tariff that proposes similar terms. Nothing in this tariff should be interpreted to force a set of compensation relationships on VoIP providers and their connecting carriers either at this Commission or in other venues. "SBC's tariff arrives at the Commission while we have before us three proceedings that raise issues related to the charges applicable to VoIP services, a petition filed by Level 3, our larger intercarrier compensation proceeding and a rulemaking on IP-enabled services. I look forward to considering these pending proceedings." -FCC- ------------------------------ From: Lisa Minter Date: Fri, 26 Nov 2004 18:24:09 -0500 Subject: An Explosive Year for VOIP Reply-To: VoIPnews@yahoogroups.com http://www.eweek.com/article2/0,1759,1732544,00.asp By Ellen Muraskin Remember 2004 as the year that VOIP finally penetrated mass consumer consciousness, as friends in normal walks of life began to gain a dim awareness of the stuff I write about. Give the lion's share of credit to Vonage. Jeff Citron's ad budget bought him banners on such general-interest sites as CNN.com, as well as space on all of the techie online hangouts. Covad aired commercials for its hosted business VOIP on prime-time television. Cable companies did likewise with their consumer VOIP (voice over IP) offerings, and even the traditional telcos -- both regional Bells and the long-distance triumverate -- were forced to follow suit this year, igniting a consumer price war. Perhaps equally important, VOIP adapters started taking up shelf space at stores such as Best Buy, Circuit City, Frye's Electronics and Staples, bundled together with service. Service providers also started marketing through e-tailers. Give credit, too, to the FCC (Federal Communications Commission), whose hands-off policy on VOIP regulation encouraged more providers to enter the marketplace, and early entrants to expand their networks. By now, we know that whatever regulation is to be imposed on VOIP will be decided at the federal level. But we still don't know exactly what those rules will be -- or how much they will force prices to rise. Full story at: http://www.eweek.com/article2/0,1759,1732544,00.asp ------------------------------ From: Dave Garland Subject: Re: Trial Shows How Spammers Operate Date: Fri, 26 Nov 2004 23:52:39 -0600 Organization: Wizard Information It was a dark and stormy night when PAT wrote: > Should I turn the system completely off when I am asleep/not home? Assuming you're doing (Windows, antivirus, spyware) updates regularly, you're doing all the right things. (If you're not running one, you might think about a software firewall like ZoneAlarm or Kerio to serve as a second line of defense. If you did become compromised that would likely block the outbound spam.) It's the people who don't do that stuff that become zombies. I've got servers on my LAN that run 24/7 for years, and have never had any problems. I've never seen a piece of spam that actually traced back to you (as opposed to just claiming that it was from you on the "From" line, which as has been noted is easy to forge). [TELECOM Digest Editor's Note: I do have Zone Alarm on all my machines as well, and I managed to finally convert my Toshiba Satellite CDS-220 which was running Win 95 as OEM over to Win 98 by just zapping the entire hard drive, then loading a fresh Win 98 then going around the net obtaining all the Toshiba Satellite CDS 220-specific drivers I needed and could remember. Don't ask me how I did it with only 32 K of ram and a speed of only 122 meg. I don't honestly know; I just kept plugging away at it. It, and one of the old Think Pad Win 95 machines (also converted to Win 98) share a hub now via my old Linksys router feeding into my newer Net Gear router. When Toshiba was running Win 95 that was the one machine that Zone Alarm would not work on until I got Win 98 on it also. For me, it was really a lot of trial and error. But if anyone ever traces back an actual spam that my computers ever sent out, I would surely appreiate knowing about it. PAT] ------------------------------ From: jdj Subject: Re: Trial Shows How Spammers Operate Date: Sat, 27 Nov 2004 00:11:39 -0800 Organization: Posted via Supernews, http://www.supernews.com Looks like Lycos has got the idea: The Register reports that Lycos Europe is distributing a screensaver that is intended to drive traffic on a verified spam site up to very expensive levels: http://www.theregister.co.uk/2004/11/26/lycos_europe_spam_blitz/ Almost the same idea as mentioned here except that the screensaver does not hit the sites in response to received spam. I found a Sourceforge project that just set up shop with the intent to request images from spam sites in response to received spam. Sorry, I lost the project info. It has just set up and has no software yet. Looks like spammers will now be the ones going on the defensive instead of the other way round. This is going to get interesting ... ------------------------------ From: charlie@cdsdetroit.com (charlie3) Subject: Re: Dropping SBC For a VoIP Solution -- Vonage or Packet8 ?? Date: 26 Nov 2004 20:59:50 -0800 Organization: http://groups.google.com I dropped my SBC home phone for Vonage last spring. I'm satisfied. I tested Vonage before dropping the SBC phone and waited until I had a cell phone that worked at home for backup (Verizon). There were a few hiccups and things to sort out but the service is a routine part of life now. Vonage lets me set things up to ring the cell and home phones simultaneously so either phone can be used to take a call. No one needs the cell phone number or even needs to know I have a cell phone. If my broad band connection goes down Vonage automatically forwards to the cell phone. The cell and vonage services are a powerful combination for me. Charlie ------------------------------ From: Scott V Date: Sat, 27 Nov 2004 00:26:13 -0500 Subject: Re: FCC Watching SBC Web Phone Charge If they're going to tax that or put charges that are extra onto that, heck, why don't we make charges for every website, email, better yet, how bout every word we see or picture we see. Get my point about this? Its just my opinion though. I mean, the ISP fees sure are there, but once you have it, its free, so why not keep VOIP the same, FREE except for those monthly charges? Ya know what I mean? Thanks, Scott > http://money.cnn.com/2004/11/26/news/fortune500/sbc_fcc.reut/ > FCC watching SBC Web phone charge > Firm's new connection charge for calls made over the Internet is being > watched, Powell says. > November 26, 2004: 3:26 PM EST > WASHINGTON (Reuters) - SBC Communications Inc.'s new connection charge for > calls made over the Internet is being watched, Federal Communications > Commission Chairman Michael Powell said Friday. > Powell said SBC's "TIPToP" plan shouldn't be used to force higher > connection charges on voice-over-Internet protocol (VoIP) services or to > discriminate against SBC competitors. > "Should we conclude that this tariff is being used to justify the > imposition of traditional tariffed access charges on VoIP providers or to > discriminate against SBC's competitors, the commission will take > appropriate action... ," Powell said in a statement. > Full story at: > http://money.cnn.com/2004/11/26/news/fortune500/sbc_fcc.reut/ ------------------------------ From: DevilsPGD Subject: Re: 'Frontline' Files an Eye-Opening Credit Report Date: Sat, 27 Nov 2004 02:26:16 -0700 Organization: Posted via Supernews, http://www.supernews.com In message Andrew wrote: >> Secret History of the Credit Card >> http://www.pbs.org/wgbh/pages/frontline/shows/credit/ > Very interesting. Both Discover and Citbank seem to be using two > different techniques desribed in the article to try to screw me. One > way the issuers screw cardholders is by not reporting the cardholders' > credit limit to the reporting agencies. This is an intentional attempt > to keep your FICO score low to prevent other card issuers from > poaching you. A big part of your fico score is your debt to credit > limit ratio. Equifax/Experian/Transunion substitute your historical > higest balance for purposes of calculating your debt/credit limit > ratio when the card issuers withhold your credit limit. Discover does > not report my $11k credit limit --my credit report just shows my high > balance of $2400 instead. Interesting. This can work to your advantage too -- I have a couple line of credits, one at 8.5% (with my bank) and one at 29% (with a legal loan shark ...) I went in to talk to the bank about increasing my credit limit on the line of credit and reducing my Visa's credit limit, and they said no on the grounds that even though the 29% line of credit is currently at $0, if I were to run it up to the maximum the next day it would make me an unacceptable credit risk (because my overall debt load would be too high.) It would have worked significantly to my benefit of the 29% line of credit only reported the balance ($0) instead of the credit limit. > A review of my credit report also show that Citibank is pulling my > credit report each and every month. This is no doubt an attempt to > take advantage of 'universal fault', i.e. use a late car payment or > utility payment as an excuse to raise your credit card rate even if > your credit card payment history is spotless. I have never ever > carried a balance on any of my credit cards, so in my case, it's > rather pointless of them to try to dig up a late payment to one of my > other creditors. A punitive credit card rate would not affect me. Interesting, I thought that "universal fault" schemes had been outlawed due to the risk of one creditor fucking up their records. I had a department store credit card when I was younger. Some months after it was paid and the account was closed, they added a note to my credit file that the account was 1 month overdue on a $29 payment. The notes say that they're reporting for the September monthly period, my last payment was in February, but somehow I'm only a month late AND have a $0 balance. This would trip a "universal fault" clause and hurt my other interest bearing accounts, if I had any that tried the universal fault crap. As it is, any time I'm at the bank discussing interest, I have them read the notes, they laugh and remove it from their internal copy of the credit report (so it doesn't affect me, since it's clearly impossible), so it hasn't actually impacted me, although if I changed to another bank it might. Do not taunt zombie badgers ------------------------------ From: Budwich Subject: Re: Routing Problems To the Cayman Islands Date: Sat, 27 Nov 2004 09:56:24 -0500 Let me understand this ... you test calls from a "all tier 1" carrier coming in and there is no problem. AND they are "officially" the only carriers allowed in (have either direct trunking / connections in or coming thru a "gateway"). "Other" carriers ("non-official") that are coming thru (have to be coming thru some gateway since you wouldn't have direct groups to someone who isn't official ... right???) are having problems. Why is this your problem? Is it not a gateway issue? Sound "interesting" ... especially the "test numbers" ...:-) good luck but I would go back to the gateway. Paul Barnes wrote in message news:telecom23.569.5@telecom-digest.org: > Hi All: > I work for Cable and Wireless in the Caribbean, and we have received > several complaints that in the past 3-4 weeks, that persons in many > parts of the world (including the US and Canada) who try to call > cellphone NXX codes in the Cayman Islands have been experiencing > difficulties. > Some of the experiences received when placing the calls are dead > air, fast busies, reorder tones, pretty much everything else besides > a completed call. Note that the cellular infrastructure is back on > its feet after the passage of Hurricane Ivan in September, RF > problems are not contributing to this issue. > We have arranged for test calls to be made to the Cayman cellphone > NXX ranges from all of the major Tier 1 international carriers with > whom C&W has agreements to bring traffic into the region: ATT, > IDT, MCI, Sprint, BT, Teleglobe and CWC. All of these test calls > were successful. We think that these problems may have resulted > from some least-cost routing arrangement that a tier 2 or 3 > carrier is engaged in. C&W has no direct relationships with any > such carriers. I was hoping that someone in the group might be > able to offer some advice on how we could proceed to get some help > in fixing this routing problem. I have listed below some test > Cayman cellular numbers, if any one in the group would be so good > as to dial these numbers and let me know if they were successful in > reach the party in Cayman, I would appreciate it. > Cayman Islands NPA, 345 (part of the North American Numbering plan) > Test numbers: 345 516 0810 > 345 525 0006 > 345 916 2850 > 345 914 0303 > Thanks in advance for any feedback, advice, ideas, etc. Regards, > Paul Barnes Manager, Technology & Operations Cable & Wireless > Carrier Services Tel: 246-292-1297 Email: paul.r.barnes@cw.com ------------------------------ Date: Sat, 27 Nov 2004 08:14:58 +0800 Subject: Last Laugh! The Collected Wisdom of Dubya Bush From: A Friend Dubya Quotes (Actual Quotes From George W. Bush) "If we don't succeed, we run the risk of failure." ..George W. Bush "Republicans understand the importance of bondage between a mother and child." ..Governor George W. Bush "Welcome to Mrs. Bush, and my fellow astronauts." ..Governor George W. Bush "Mars is essentially in the same orbit ... Mars is somewhat the same distance from the Sun, which is very important. We have seen pictures where there are canals, we believe, and water. If there is water, that means there is oxygen. If oxygen, that means we can breathe." ..Governor George W. Bush, 8/11/94 "The Holocaust was an obscene period in our nation's history. I mean in this century's history. But we all lived in this century. I didn't live in this century." ..Governor George W. Bush, 9/15/95 "I believe we are on an irreversible trend toward more freedom and democracy -- but that could change." ..Governor George W. Bush, 5/22/98 "One word sums up probably the responsibility of any Governor, and that one word is 'to be prepared'." ..Governor George W. Bush, 12/6/93 "Verbosity leads to unclear, inarticulate things." ..Governor George W. Bush, 11/30/96 "I have made good judgments in the past. I have made good judgments in the future." ..Governor George W. Bush "The future will be better tomorrow." ..Governor George W. Bush "We're going to have the best educated American people in the world." ..Governor George W. Bush 9/21/97 "People that are really very weird can get into sensitive positions and have a tremendous impact on history." ..Governor George W. Bush "I stand by all the misstatements that I've made." ..Governor George W. Bush to Sam Donaldson, 8/17/93 "We have a firm commitment to NATO, we are a part of NATO. We have a firm commitment to Europe. We are a part of Europe." ..Governor George W. Bush "Public speaking is very easy." ..Governor George W. Bush to reporters "I am not part of the problem. I am a Republican." ..Governor George W. Bush "A low voter turnout is an indication of fewer people going to the polls." ..Governor George W. Bush "When I have been asked who caused the riots and the killing in LA, my answer has been direct & simple: Who is to blame for the riots? The rioters are to blame. Who is to blame for the killings? The killers are to blame." ..George W. Bush "Illegitimacy is something we should talk about in terms of not having it." ..Governor George W. Bush 5/20/96 "We are ready for any unforeseen event that may or may not occur." ..Governor George W. Bush 9/22/97 "For NASA, space is still a high priority." ..Governor George W. Bush, 9/5/93 "Quite frankly, teachers are the only profession that teach our children." ..Governor George W. Bush , 9/18/95 "The American people would not want to know of any misquotes that George Bush may or may not make." ..Governor George W. Bush "We're all capable of mistakes, but I do not care to enlighten you on the mistakes we may or may not have made." ..Governor George W. Bush "It isn't pollution that's harming the environment. It's the impurities in our air and water that are doing it." ..Governor George W. Bush "[It's] time for the human race to enter the solar system." ..Governor George W. Bush ------------------------------ TELECOM Digest is an electronic journal devoted mostly but not exclusively to telecommunications topics. It is circulated anywhere there is email, in addition to various telecom forums on a variety of networks such as Compuserve and America On Line, Yahoo Groups, and other forums. It is also gatewayed to Usenet where it appears as the moderated newsgroup 'comp.dcom.telecom'. TELECOM Digest is a not-for-profit, mostly non-commercial educational service offered to the Internet by Patrick Townson. All the contents of the Digest are compilation-copyrighted. You may reprint articles in some other media on an occasional basis, but please attribute my work and that of the original author. Contact information: Patrick Townson/TELECOM Digest Post Office Box 50 Independence, KS 67301 Phone: 620-402-0134 Fax 1: 775-255-9970 Fax 2: 530-309-7234 Fax 3: 208-692-5145 Email: editor@telecom-digest.org Subscribe: telecom-subscribe@telecom-digest.org Unsubscribe:telecom-unsubscribe@telecom-digest.org This Digest is the oldest continuing e-journal about telecomm- unications on the Internet, having been founded in August, 1981 and published continuously since then. Our archives are available for your review/research. We believe we are the oldest e-zine/mailing list on the internet in any category! URL information: http://telecom-digest.org Anonymous FTP: mirror.lcs.mit.edu/telecom-archives/archives/ (or use our mirror site: ftp.epix.net/pub/telecom-archives) Email <==> FTP: telecom-archives@telecom-digest.org Send a simple, one line note to that automated address for a help file on how to use the automatic retrieval system for archives files. You can get desired files in email. ************************************************************************* * TELECOM Digest is partially funded by a grant from * * Judith Oppenheimer, President of ICB Inc. and purveyor of accurate * * 800 & Dot Com News, Intelligence, Analysis, and Consulting. * * http://ICBTollFree.com, http://1800TheExpert.com * * Views expressed herein should not be construed as representing * * views of Judith Oppenheimer or ICB Inc. * ************************************************************************* ICB Toll Free News. Contact information is not sold, rented or leased. One click a day feeds a person a meal. Go to http://www.thehungersite.com Copyright 2004 ICB, Inc. and TELECOM Digest. All rights reserved. Our attorney is Bill Levant, of Blue Bell, PA. ************************ DIRECTORY ASSISTANCE JUST 65 CENTS ONE OR TWO INQUIRIES CHARGED TO YOUR CREDIT CARD! REAL TIME, UP TO DATE! SPONSORED BY TELECOM DIGEST AND EASY411.COM SIGN UP AT http://www.easy411.com/telecomdigest ! ************************ --------------------------------------------------------------- Finally, the Digest is funded by gifts from generous readers such as yourself who provide funding in amounts deemed appropriate. Your help is important and appreciated. A suggested donation of fifty dollars per year per reader is considered appropriate. See our address above. Please make at least a single donation to cover the cost of processing your name to the mailing list. All opinions expressed herein are deemed to be those of the author. Any organizations listed are for identification purposes only and messages should not be considered any official expression by the organization. End of TELECOM Digest V23 #570 ****************************** From editor@telecom-digest.org Mon Nov 29 14:15:08 2004 Received: (from ptownson@localhost) by massis.lcs.mit.edu (8.11.6p3/8.11.6) id iATJF8k29495; Mon, 29 Nov 2004 14:15:08 -0500 (EST) Date: Mon, 29 Nov 2004 14:15:08 -0500 (EST) From: editor@telecom-digest.org Message-Id: <200411291915.iATJF8k29495@massis.lcs.mit.edu> X-Authentication-Warning: massis.lcs.mit.edu: ptownson set sender to editor@telecom-digest.org using -f To: ptownson Approved: patsnewlist Subject: TELECOM Digest V23 #571 TELECOM Digest Mon, 29 Nov 2004 14:15:00 EST Volume 23 : Issue 571 Inside This Issue: Editor: Patrick A. Townson Telecom Update (Canada) #459, November 29, 2004 (Angus TeleManagement) A Burglary Foiled by Calls That Didn't Reach 911 (Tony P.) Breaking, Entering Your PC (Monty Solomon) TiVo Awaits Verdict on Copy Protection (Monty Solomon) RFID Question (Luke Nichols) 'Ringback' Tones May Be Next Big Thing (Monty Solomon) International Fax From Vonage VOIP? (Hemant Shah) Skype and Outlook and Limited Credits (Presspley) China Internet Firms Seek New Sources of Revenue (Lisa Minter) Alltel Buys AT&T Wireless Assets (Telecom dailyLead from USTA) Re: Routing Problems To the Cayman Islands (danny burstein) Calling Card Needed -- Short Interaction Sequence (Dr. Edward Gehringer) Re: Trial Shows How Spammers Operate (Steve Sobol) Re: Trial Shows How Spammers Operate (T. Sean Weintz) Re: Dropping SBC For a VoIP Solution - Vonage or Packet8 (Ringo Langly) Re: WiFi Centrino RANGE Increase POSSIBLE? (Chip G) All contents here are copyrighted by Patrick Townson and the individual writers/correspondents. Articles may be used in other journals or newsgroups, provided the writer's name and the Digest are included in the fair use quote. By using -any name or email address- included herein for -any- reason other than responding to an article herein, you agree to pay a hundred dollars to the recipients of the email. =========================== Addresses herein are not to be added to any mailing list, nor to be sold or given away without explicit written consent. Chain letters, viruses, porn, spam, and miscellaneous junk are definitely unwelcome. We must fight spam for the same reason we fight crime: not because we are naive enough to believe that we will ever stamp it out, but because we do not want the kind of world that results when no one stands against crime. Geoffrey Welsh =========================== See the bottom of this issue for subscription and archive details and the name of our lawyer; other stuff of interest. ---------------------------------------------------------------------- Date: Mon, 29 Nov 2004 10:35:54 -0500 From: Angus TeleManagement Subject: Telecom Update (Canada) #459, November 29, 2004 ************************************************************ TELECOM UPDATE ************************************************************ published weekly by Angus TeleManagement Group http://www.angustel.ca Number 459: November 29, 2004 Publication of Telecom Update is made possible by generous financial support from: ** ALLSTREAM: www.allstream.com ** AVAYA: www.avaya.ca/en/ ** BELL CANADA: www.bell.ca ** CISCO SYSTEMS CANADA: www.cisco.com/ca/ ** ERICSSON: www.ericsson.ca ** MITEL NETWORKS: www.mitel.com/ ** SPRINT CANADA: www.sprint.ca ** UTC CANADA: www.canada.utc.org/ ************************************************************ IN THIS ISSUE: ** CRTC Releases Report on Competition ** Gatineau to Implement 3-1-1 Service ** 8.5 Million Wireless Numbers Ported in U.S. ** Bell Ads Warn of Modem Hijacking ** Rogers Implements Wireless Priority ** Quebec Union Rejects Telus Offer ** CRTC Announces Review of Northwestel Funding ** CRTC to Hear Call-Net, Bell Billing Dispute ** Consultants Call for Speakers ** Piaskoski Joins Miller Thompson ** Certification for Call Centre Managers ============================================================ CRTC RELEASES REPORT ON COMPETITION: The CRTC has released its fourth annual report on the status of telecom competition and the deployment of advanced telecom infrastructure in Canada. Results are for the end of 2003. ** Telecom service revenues grew by 1.1% to $31.8 billion, accounting for 2.3% of Canada's GDP. ** Capital spending fell 17%, on top of a 25% drop in 2002. ** Nationally, competitor market increased to 2% of residential lines, compared to 1.4% in 2002. Competitor market share is 16%-18% in Charlottetown and Halifax, and 2%-6% in Vancouver, Calgary, Montreal, Toronto, and five other Ontario cities. ** Nationally, competitors had 8.6% of local business lines in 2003, the same as in 2002. Out-of-territory telcos had significant penetration in Vancouver (17%) and Edmonton (13%), and smaller inroads in several cities. Non-telco competitors had over 15% share in Kitchener, London, Toronto, and Windsor, and smaller penetration in 17 other cities. ** Wireless revenues grew by 13% in 2003, while subscriber totals increased by 11%. Two-thirds of households have at least one wireless subscription. ** 56% of Canadian households have Internet access; 36% (4.5 million households) have high-speed service. High-speed access is now available to 95% of Canadian urban households but only 63% of rural households. www.crtc.gc.ca/ENG/whatsnew/2004/nov25.htm GATINEAU TO IMPLEMENT 3-1-1 SERVICE: Starting in summer 2005, residents of the City of Gatineau, Quebec, will be able to dial 3-1-1 to access information on municipal services and make requests to City departments. Gatineau was one of five cities that requested assignment of 3-1-1 for non-emergency municipal use, which was approved by the CRTC in early November (see Telecom Update #456). 8.5 MILLION WIRELESS NUMBERS PORTED IN U.S.: It is now one year since U.S. cellular companies were required to let customers keep their phone numbers when they change carriers. The Federal Communications Commission says that 8.5 million people have taken advantage of the new rule, and about 10% of those "cut the cord" by transferring wireline numbers to wireless service. BELL ADS WARN OF MODEM HIJACKING: Bell Canada has launched a "multimedia advertising campaign" to educate consumers about Internet dialers that hijack modems to generate long distance calls (and big bills) to overseas locations. Bell and Telus recently began blocking direct-dialed calls to countries most often called by the dialing programs. (See Telecom Update #439) ROGERS IMPLEMENTS WIRELESS PRIORITY: Rogers Wireless is the first Canadian cellco to implement Wireless Priority Service, which gives government-authorized users priority access to wireless service during emergencies. QUEBEC UNION REJECTS TELUS OFFER: A contract offer by Telus Quebec has been rejected by 560 supervisors and professionals, members of the Canadian Union of Public Employees. Telus and the union will continue negotiations. CRTC ANNOUNCES REVIEW OF NORTHWESTEL FUNDING: Telecom PN 2004-6 opens a review of Northwestel's 2004 and 2005 supplemental funding requirements, along with an assessment of its service improvement plan and quality of service results. To participate, notify the CRTC by December 9. www.crtc.gc.ca/archive/ENG/Notices/2004/pt2004-6.htm CRTC TO HEAR CALL-NET, BELL BILLING DISPUTE: An expedited hearing on December 13 will consider a dispute between Call-Net and Bell Canada regarding Bell's diagnostic and labour charges. www.crtc.gc.ca/PartVII/eng/2004/8661/c25_200409442.htm CONSULTANTS CALL FOR SPEAKERS: The Canadian Telecommunications Consultants Association will hold its Spring 2005 Conference at the Hockley Valley Resort, northwest of Toronto, Ontario, on April 7-9, 2005. Proposals for presentations at the conference are due by December 15. For information, write ctca.speakers@ctca.ca, or visit www.ctca.ca. PIASKOSKI JOINS MILLER THOMPSON: Regulatory lawyer Michael Piaskoski has left Blake, Cassels & Graydon to join the Toronto office of Miller Thomson. CERTIFICATION FOR CALL CENTRE MANAGERS: Canadian call centre managers seeking education and certification of their skills can now receive the Call Center Industry Advisory Council's testing programs from Angus Dortmans Associates. CIAC is a non-profit, industry-sanctioned standards and certifying body for customer care and support professionals. ** For further information, e-mail Henry Dortmans (dortmans@angustel.ca). ============================================================ HOW TO SUBMIT ITEMS FOR TELECOM UPDATE E-MAIL: editors@angustel.ca FAX: 905-686-2655 MAIL: TELECOM UPDATE Angus TeleManagement Group 8 Old Kingston Road Ajax, Ontario Canada L1T 2Z7 =========================================================== HOW TO SUBSCRIBE (OR UNSUBSCRIBE) TELECOM UPDATE is provided in electronic form only. There are two formats available: 1. The fully-formatted edition is posted on the World Wide Web on the first business day of the week at www.angustel.ca 2. The e-mail edition is distributed free of charge. To subscribe, send an e-mail message to: join-telecom_update@nova.sparklist.com To stop receiving the e-mail edition, send an e-mail message to: leave-telecom_update@nova.sparklist.com Sending e-mail to these addresses will automatically add or remove the sender's e-mail address from the list. Leave subject line and message area blank. We do not give Telecom Update subscribers' e-mail addresses to any third party. For more information, see www.angustel.ca/update/privacy.html. =========================================================== COPYRIGHT AND CONDITIONS OF USE: All contents copyright 2004 Angus TeleManagement Group Inc. All rights reserved. For further information, including permission to reprint or reproduce, please e-mail rosita@angustel.ca or phone 905-686-5050 ext 500. The information and data included has been obtained from sources which we believe to be reliable, but Angus TeleManagement makes no warranties or representations whatsoever regarding accuracy, completeness, or adequacy. Opinions expressed are based on interpretation of available information, and are subject to change. If expert advice on the subject matter is required, the services of a competent professional should be obtained. ------------------------------ From: Tony P. Subject: A Burglary Foiled by Calls That Didn't Reach 911 Organization: ATCC Date: Sat, 27 Nov 2004 18:40:07 -0500 This is interesting. Verizon says there is all sorts of security yet there isn't any. I know that at the CLEC switches here in Providence none of them have active security. One houses a 5ESS and the other a DMS-200. They really should have checked to see what they were removing when they snapped the circuit packs out. I do find it hard to believe that the cost of some of the packs was $70,000 but I do know that the AT&T/Lucent/Avaya built stuff used lots of gold etc. in the assembling of those packs. For those who do not want to register for the NYT and are using Firefox just get the BugMeNot extension. Otherwise use cottp as both the username and password. ------------------------------ Date: Sat, 27 Nov 2004 21:04:02 -0500 From: Monty Solomon Subject: Breaking, Entering Your PC COLUMN ONE Spyware, the newest and nastiest online plague, can paralyze or commandeer a computer. Help is hard to find, but it's out there. By Terry McDermott, Times Staff Writer It can, and often does, start something like this: You're online, maybe searching for a specific piece of information, maybe just cruising the Web. I was investigating new search technologies that were advertised as useful in dealing with variations in the spelling of names and had read that Lycos, a pre-Google Internet portal and search engine, had developed some. I found links for Lycos and clicked on one. That was the beginning. Within minutes, my computer was swamped with advertisements - pop-ups, pop-unders, pop-all-overs. There were so many I couldn't close them before others started appearing. I had to shut the computer down. When it restarted, my Web browser had a new pornographic home page, and soon another flood of advertisements was underway. This time, I was able to get rid of most of it and resume working. It went on for days. The blizzard of ads sometimes thinned, sometimes thickened. At times, there were so many that the computer couldn't process them all and froze. Every time I restarted, my home page was reset to the pornographic site. Every time I tried to do a Google search, a Lycos search engine appeared instead. New items for services called Bargain Buddies and Deal Helper were added to my Web favorites list. I deleted these entries, but they would mysteriously reappear. Once, when I was being buried yet again by ads, I heard my computer modem dialing a telephone number. My computer is connected to a broadband Internet access service, so the only time I ever used the modem was to send and receive faxes. I couldn't imagine why the modem was dialing. More to the point, I couldn't stop it. I have been using PCs since 1985 and have installed hard drives, operating systems, memory, CD-ROM drives and countless software programs. I've written some rudimentary programs to automate common word-processing tasks. I vainly considered myself a computer sophisticate. So what did I do? I cursed and screamed. I tried to turn the modem off with software switches. Finally, I did what any sophisticated computer user would do -- I yanked the telephone cord out of the wall, then began wildly deleting every suspicious file I could find on my system. That worked to a limited extent. I installed a pop-up ad blocker and downloaded free programs that were supposed to rid me of the plague that had descended. Most days, I was able to slog along and there were even times I thought the fixes had worked. But the computer was still agonizingly slow, and the ads and the hijacked Web searches invariably reappeared. Then a month later, I received a bill for $25 from some company I had never heard of. It was for the telephone call my computer had made, to Britain it turned out. The Internet, at once one of the wonders of the modern world and one of its least likable neighborhoods, has suffered a series of afflictions, scams and perversions throughout its brief history. The latest and in many ways most frustrating is the one I was now facing -- spyware. Spyware is a broad category of software distributed online, usually without a user's knowledge, to millions of personal computers around the world, often crippling them in the process. It includes several subcategories, including: http://www.latimes.com/business/la-na-spyware26nov26,1,7307898.story ------------------------------ Date: Sat, 27 Nov 2004 22:37:52 -0500 From: Monty Solomon Subject: TiVo Awaits Verdict on Copy Protection News: by Robin Berger MPAA leads opposition LOS ANGELES Consumers continue to be assured that the promise of digital technology's "any time, any place" access to the media they crave is just around the corner -- the wheels are in motion. At the same time, a considerable backspin continues to be provided by those who currently control its dissemination -- and fear the boogeyman behind remote devices. Yet another tech and media, anti-privacy consortium was formed last month. This one -- Coral -- includes Sony, Hewlett-Packard, Philips Electronics, Matsushita Electric (Panasonic), Samsung, Twentieth Century Fox, RealNetworks and digital rights management company InterTrust Technologies. Apple Computer and Microsoft are notably absent. Meanwhile, back in Washington, the FCC continues to mediate the fate of "digital output protection technology and recording method" providers. The commission certified the following 13 technologies in August: * MagicGateType-R (four types from Sony Corp.) * SmartRight (developed by a conglomerate headed by Thomson) * Vidi Recordable DBD Protection System (Philips Electronics and Hewlett-Packard) * High Bandwidth Digital Content Protection (Digital Content Protection, LLC) * Content Protection Recordable Media for Video Content (4C, LLC) * TiVoGuard Digital Output Protection Technology * Digital Transmission Content Protection (Digital Transmission Licensing Administration) * Helix DRM Trusted Recorder (Real) * Windows Media Digital Rights Management (Microsoft Corp.) * D-VHS (Victor Company of Japan, aka JVC) The FCC's docket indicates that these technologies have been under commission review since at least February, to ensure that content marked with the Broadcast Flag is protected. http://www.tvtechnology.com/features/news/News_Tivo.shtml ------------------------------ From: Luke Nichols Subject: RFID Question Date: Sun, 28 Nov 2004 04:24:35 -0500 Reply-To: Luke Nichols To whom it may concern: Do you have any news on this RFID technology everyone is talking about? If you know of web sites, and news sources about this technology, can you email me, or send me something in the mail? Luke Nichols 299 Old Oakvale Road Princeton, WV 24740 USA ------------------------------ Date: Sun, 28 Nov 2004 22:23:40 -0500 From: Monty Solomon Subject: 'Ringback' Tones May Be Next Big Thing By BRUCE MEYERSON AP Business Writer NEW YORK (AP) -- Ring tones are so yesterday. If wireless companies have their way, the next multibillion-dollar surprise in the cellular business will be "Ringback" tones. Instead of the usual dialing noise that people hear when phoning someone, callers to Verizon Wireless subscribers may soon find themselves listening to a song until the phone is answered. The service, pioneered by SK Telecom of Korea, is debuting in the United States in California and is slated to be available nationally by mid-2005. Verizon Wireless, a partnership between Verizon Communications Inc. and Vodafone Group PLC, is charging 99 cents per month plus an annual fee of $1.99 for each Ringback Tone chosen. Other U.S. carriers are said to be considering a similar service. Verizon subscribers can assign specific tunes for different callers to hear, choosing among 2,200 songs from 13 music genres provided by Warner Music Group and Sony BMG Music Entertainment. SK Telcom, which developed the technology being used by Verizon, introduced its "ColoRing" service in Korea two years ago and has since licensed it to carriers in Vietnam, Singapore, the Philippines and Indonesia. - http://finance.lycos.com/home/news/story.asp?story=45274937 ------------------------------ From: Hemant Shah Subject: International Fax From Vonage VOIP? Date: Mon, 29 Nov 2004 16:02:30 UTC Organization: Aaja Fasaja & Co. Reply-To: NoJunkMailshah@xnet.com Folks, I am having problem sending fax to India from a Vonage Fax line. I can send fax to anywhere in U.S. and receive fax from U.S. and India. I have a Panasonic fax machine. If I use the auto dial on my fax machine it times out and goes into re-dial mode because it takes long time for Vonage to make the connection. I also tried to dial the number manually and wait for the other fax machine to pickup and press start button, but it does not make connection. Is there something I can do with Vonage setting or my fax machine setting so I can send fax to India through Vonage Fax line? This could be a deal killer for me. I want to get rid of SBC, but I also need to send fax to India. Thanks, Hemant Shah /"\ ASCII ribbon campaign E-mail: NoJunkMailshah@xnet.com \ / --------------------- X against HTML mail TO REPLY, REMOVE NoJunkMail / \ and postings FROM MY E-MAIL ADDRESS. -----------------[DO NOT SEND UNSOLICITED BULK E-MAIL]------------------ I haven't lost my mind, Above opinions are mine only. it's backed up on tape somewhere. Others can have their own. ------------------------------ From: presspley@hotmail.com (Presspley) Subject: Skype and Outlook and Limited Credits Date: 29 Nov 2004 06:13:55 -0800 Organization: http://groups.google.com Is there any software that links Outlook to Skype yet? I want to pass instructions to Skype. Also, I often dial from Portugal on Skype but we have a limit of our broadband upload/download. How could I tell whether Skype is using too many of or the other type of credit? ------------------------------ From: Lisa Minter Subject: China Internet Firms Seek New Sources of Revenue Date: Mon, 29 Nov 2004 10:39:12 EST HONG KONG (Reuters) - China Internet media firms, which struck gold with mobile phone messaging services last year, are scrambling to diversify after a government clampdown on sex-related material and a billing overhaul. Some have found new lucrative veins in online games, advertising and search services as the companies seek to protect their revenues against clampdowns and reforms by Beijing. Although the shift is being greeted with guarded enthusiasm by investors, analysts warn that the government could also interfere with their new ventures. "If you want high growth, you go for wireless," said UBS analyst Eric Wen, referring to more advanced phone features including multi-media messages. "But then you have some big brothers watching you, and they can hit you very fast. If you want to go elsewhere, maybe you can have more stable growth, but your growth rate will not be all that high." The industry's major players, including Sina Corp., Sohu.com , NetEase.com Inc., Tom Online and Linktone Ltd., have all suffered as a result of the clampdown on messaging -- a business iResearch estimates will top $480 million in revenues this year. Beijing initiated its campaign late last year against billing abuses by companies, including signing up customers who hadn't requested the service, imposing charges for phantom messages and overcharging or double-billing. INCONSISTENT BILLS In China, phone companies keep a commission for each text message sent over a mobile phone, relaying most of the revenue back to the Internet providers. The billing records of the phone companies were not always consistent with those of the Internet companies, according to the government, and it stepped in to impose a standardized billing system. The government also stepped up the campaign over the summer by sanctioning some companies for pornographic and junk mail messages. Sohu, which earned 45 percent of total first quarter revenues from short messaging services (SMS), saw that contract to 18 percent of third-quarter revenues, said Senior Director Caroline Straathof. The company, which was sanctioned in August for sending spam over its multimedia messaging services (MMS), has shifted its strategy to focus not only on mobile services, but also online games, search services and advertising. "We are right in the middle of being sanctioned in one business line, and though there are many challenges we need to deal with there, the other business lines are doing just great," Straathof said. FROM DARLINGS TO DOGS Messaging services for mobile phones had helped Sohu and its peers become Wall Street darlings in 2003 as they cashed in on China's SMS boom to turn in their first annual profits. After languishing for the two previous years, Sohu's shares shot up over 360 percent in 2003, only to drop over 40 percent this year. They have come back a bit since August as investors get more visibility on the situation and diversification efforts. At the beginning of 2004, about 60 percent of revenue for China media companies came from SMS-related services, including news, jokes and games, according to a UBS report. The investment house welcomed the recent diversification drive, saying many of the newer services should see 50 percent growth or better in 2005. Companies said diversifying their revenue streams is an effective hedge against future clampdowns but added they can never factor out the risk of government action against their newer business lines. Online games have already attracted regulators' attention, with authorities closing thousands of Internet cafes and state-run media making frequent criticism of some game content. "There's always the risk factor because investors are worried about how the Chinese will regulate," said Elaine Feng, executive vice president at Tom Online, whose SMS revenues held steady at $14.7 million from the first to the third quarters but accounted for shrinking percentage of total revenues. "For a listed company, what you have to do is make sure your operations and content are in line with the regulators, and that's all I think you can do." *** FAIR USE NOTICE. This message contains copyrighted material the use of which has not been specifically authorized by the copyright owner. This Internet discussion group is making it available without profit to group members who have expressed a prior interest in receiving the included information in their efforts to advance the understanding of literary, educational, political, and economic issues, for non-profit research and educational purposes only. I believe that this constitutes a 'fair use' of the copyrighted material as provided for in section 107 of the U.S. Copyright Law. If you wish to use this copyrighted material for purposes of your own that go beyond 'fair use,' you must obtain permission from the copyright owner, in this instance Reuters News Service. For more information go to: http://www.law.cornell.edu/uscode/17/107.shtml ------------------------------ Date: Mon, 29 Nov 2004 12:09:15 EST From: Telecom dailyLead from USTA Subject: Alltel Buys AT&T Wireless Assets Telecom dailyLead from USTA November 29, 2004 http://www.dailylead.com/latestIssue.jsp?i=17752&l=2017006 TODAY'S HEADLINES NEWS OF THE DAY * Alltel buys AT&T Wireless assets BUSINESS & INDUSTRY WATCH * Cell phone operators use phone for branding * BT sells Eutelsat stake; Intelsat takeover in jeopardy * TowerStream takes WiMAX to new heights USTA SPOTLIGHT * Order Telecommunications Billing Systems Today! EMERGING TECHNOLOGIES * DirecTV plans new DVR for 2005 * Wireless security gets an upgrade * Web TV emerges on the scene REGULATORY & LEGISLATIVE * Record labels sue Kazaa, other online file-sharing services * FCC questions SBC on Internet phone plan Follow the link below to read quick summaries of these stories and others. http://www.dailylead.com/latestIssue.jsp?i=17752&l=2017006 ------------------------------ From: Danny Burstein Subject: Printing Numbers, was Re: Routing Problems To the Cayman Islands Date: Sat, 27 Nov 2004 20:13:35 UTC Organization: PANIX Public Access Internet and UNIX, NYC Paul Barnes wrote in message news:telecom23.569.5@telecom-digest.org: ( portions snipped ) >> I work for Cable and Wireless in the Caribbean, and we have received >> several complaints that in the past 3-4 weeks, that persons in many >> parts of the world (including the US and Canada) who try to call >> cellphone NXX codes in the Cayman Islands have been experiencing >> difficulties. >> We have arranged for test calls to be made to the Cayman cellphone >> NXX ranges from all of the major Tier 1 international carriers with >> whom C&W has agreements to bring traffic into the region: ATT, >> IDT, MCI, Sprint, BT, Teleglobe and CWC. >> Cayman Islands NPA, 345 (part of the North American Numbering plan) >> Test numbers: 345 [ snip] >> 345 [ snip ] Pat, I'd be very, very, cautious about ever publishing letters like this, especially when there are requests to make phone calls to the numbers. a) it could easily be someone trying to harrass the real "owner" of those numbers and b) since these are international long distance numbers (despite the original poster's technically accurate but misleading claim that they are "part of the NANPA) the costs of making these calls could easily come as a big surprise when the bill arrives. oh, and c) it may also simply be a scheme to generate more revenue to the telco carrier ... _____________________________________________________ Knowledge may be power, but communications is the key dannyb@panix.com [to foil spammers, my address has been double rot-13 encoded] [TELECOM Digest Editor's Note: Just FYI, before I printed that message, I personally called two of the four numbers given. A man answered on each of them. I told him I was calling to verify the request for assistance in testing. He said 'thanks' and asked me where I was calling from. I told him 'Kansas, USA, area 620-330' (because I was using my cell phone.) He said okay, thanks, and we disconnected. My total call may have lasted twenty seconds on each of them. I probably should have added this note to the original message, but didn't. If I get any outrageous phone charges, I will let folks here know. PAT] ------------------------------ From: Dr. Edward F Gehringer Subject: Calling Card Needed -- Short Interaction Sequence Date: Mon, 29 Nov 2004 12:51:35 -0500 Organization: NC State University There's no shortage of calling-card info on the Web, but my concern is placing a call without going through a lengthy interaction sequence. I can't find any info on this. I typically use cards from payphones when away from my local calling area ... no, I don't have a cellphone with a national calling plan :-( I used to use the cards I got from BJ's. They recently switched to MCI as a provider. MCI has a non-bypassable message that goes something like, "A charge of 30 cents will be deducted from your card in addition to regular charges each time you place a call from a payphone." Going through this message, plus the language prompt, doubles the time it takes to place a call! This gets very annoying when I have several calls to make. Does anyone know (a) of a card with a competitive price that does not have extra messages or prompts, beyond the access code and the phone number, or (b) a place where I can obtain such information? -Ed Gehringer (who posted to this group a lot 10 years ago, but not in the last few years) [TELECOM Digest Editor's Note: Welcome back, Ed! Nice to see you around again; don't be such a stranger in the future! PAT] ------------------------------ From: Steve Sobol Subject: Re: Trial Shows How Spammers Operate Date: Sat, 27 Nov 2004 11:08:37 -0800 Organization: Glorb Internet Services, http://www.glorb.com jdj wrote: > Looks like Lycos has got the idea: Riiiiight. Except it won't work, and DDoS'ing the site isn't cool regardless of what kind of site it is. But who cares that this "solution" would cost ISPs a ton in increased bandwidth costs? Feh! Screw the ISPs, we don't need 'em anyhow, right? Whatever happened to "don't fight abuse with abuse"? Lycos executives and the project managers in charge of this crap ought to be kicked in the head for even coming up with, let alone approving and proceeding with, this idea. > Looks like spammers will now be the ones going on the defensive > instead of the other way round. > This is going to get interesting ... Only until the ISPs blackhole or nullroute the IP addresses of the sites involved. They'll have to. You do realize that when you are talking about transit between Internet providers, there is no such thing as flat-rate, right? It's all paid for based on how much traffic is transferred ... > The Register reports that Lycos Europe is distributing a screensaver > that is intended to drive traffic on a verified spam site up to very > expensive levels: Oh, and not only that, what happens the first time spam is sent out advertising a website that someone wants to get in trouble? It's happened before. JustThe.net Internet & New Media Services, http://JustThe.net/ Steven J. Sobol, Geek In Charge / 888.480.4NET (4638) / sjsobol@JustThe.net PGP Key available from your friendly local key server (0xE3AE35ED) Apple Valley, California Nothing scares me anymore. I have three kids. ------------------------------ From: T. Sean Weintz Subject: Re: Trial Shows How Spammers Operate Date: Mon, 29 Nov 2004 11:40:17 -0500 Organization: Posted via Supernews, http://www.supernews.com Scott Dorsey wrote: > In the case of the rule I gave, it will send a message to comcast's > abuse address whenever mail sent from a dynamically-allocated comcast > address arrives. There is NO REASON for anyone on a > dynamically-allocated block to be sending mail directly; mail sent > from Comcast users should go through their mail server and not from > their direct address. So the only mail you will ever get from these > blocks will be spam, mostly from zombie machines. Not a good idea. Some of the addresses in the Comcast dynamic IP space are NOT dynamic addesses, but DHCP reservations (that the customer pays an extra $50 per month for) -- they are not leases -- the IP address is reserved specifically for that users MAC address until Comcast manually deletes it. And such addresses have a TOS/AUP that specifically allows the user to run a mail server. So there IS a legit reason for some folks to send mail directly from a Comcast IP. ------------------------------ From: rlangly@gmail.com (Ringo Langly) Subject: Re: Dropping SBC For a VoIP Solution -- Vonage or Packet8 ?? Date: 28 Nov 2004 12:47:56 -0800 Organization: http://groups.google.com charlie@cdsdetroit.com (charlie3) wrote in message news:: > I dropped my SBC home phone for Vonage last spring. I'm satisfied. I > tested Vonage before dropping the SBC phone and waited until I had a > cell phone that worked at home for backup (Verizon). There were a few > hiccups and things to sort out but the service is a routine part of > life now. > Vonage lets me set things up to ring the cell and home phones > simultaneously so either phone can be used to take a call. No one > needs the cell phone number or even needs to know I have a cell phone. > If my broad band connection goes down Vonage automatically forwards to > the cell phone. The cell and vonage services are a powerful > combination for me. > Charlie Hi Charlie, Thanks for the review! I too like Vonage over Packet8, but Vonage isn't in my local area yet. I thought about going ahead with Vonage and getting a number from a nearby town (closest is about 30 miles away), but long distance is still long distance for friends and family in town. If Packet8 doesn't suit my needs I might still drop them and go with Vonage anyway because I do like the perks Vonage has over Packet8. I'll know tomorrow as that's when the Packet8 device is set to arrive. After that I'll post some reviews on how well it works. Thanks and take care, Ringo ------------------------------ From: Chip G Subject: Re: WiFi Centrino RANGE Increase POSSIBLE? Organization: Comcast Online Date: Mon, 29 Nov 2004 16:17:10 GMT Michal wrote in message news:telecom23.563.3@telecom-digest.org: > Hi, > I have a Toshiba A50-101 which is Centrino (with Wifi of course) I'm > using Wifi access point from Linksys named WAG54G. I need to use the > computer on other floor than the access point is. It works really > poor. The wifi range is not sufficient. Is it possible to increase my > wifi range by using some sort of PCMCIA antenna or something? > Thanks for any advice! > Regards, > Mike Personally, I use an Avaya Wireless PC Card and find that my reception is much better than using the integrated WiFi on my IBM Thinkpad T-41. I am not real familiar with the PC model you mention but suspect that you will find that a PC Card will work better. The Avaya Wireless card I have also has a little jack on it which allows for attaching an external antenna. Hope this helps, Chip ------------------------------ TELECOM Digest is an electronic journal devoted mostly but not exclusively to telecommunications topics. It is circulated anywhere there is email, in addition to various telecom forums on a variety of networks such as Compuserve and America On Line, Yahoo Groups, and other forums. It is also gatewayed to Usenet where it appears as the moderated newsgroup 'comp.dcom.telecom'. TELECOM Digest is a not-for-profit, mostly non-commercial educational service offered to the Internet by Patrick Townson. All the contents of the Digest are compilation-copyrighted. You may reprint articles in some other media on an occasional basis, but please attribute my work and that of the original author. Contact information: Patrick Townson/TELECOM Digest Post Office Box 50 Independence, KS 67301 Phone: 620-402-0134 Fax 1: 775-255-9970 Fax 2: 530-309-7234 Fax 3: 208-692-5145 Email: editor@telecom-digest.org Subscribe: telecom-subscribe@telecom-digest.org Unsubscribe:telecom-unsubscribe@telecom-digest.org This Digest is the oldest continuing e-journal about telecomm- unications on the Internet, having been founded in August, 1981 and published continuously since then. Our archives are available for your review/research. We believe we are the oldest e-zine/mailing list on the internet in any category! URL information: http://telecom-digest.org Anonymous FTP: mirror.lcs.mit.edu/telecom-archives/archives/ (or use our mirror site: ftp.epix.net/pub/telecom-archives) Email <==> FTP: telecom-archives@telecom-digest.org Send a simple, one line note to that automated address for a help file on how to use the automatic retrieval system for archives files. You can get desired files in email. ************************************************************************* * TELECOM Digest is partially funded by a grant from * * Judith Oppenheimer, President of ICB Inc. and purveyor of accurate * * 800 & Dot Com News, Intelligence, Analysis, and Consulting. * * http://ICBTollFree.com, http://1800TheExpert.com * * Views expressed herein should not be construed as representing * * views of Judith Oppenheimer or ICB Inc. * ************************************************************************* ICB Toll Free News. Contact information is not sold, rented or leased. One click a day feeds a person a meal. Go to http://www.thehungersite.com Copyright 2004 ICB, Inc. and TELECOM Digest. All rights reserved. Our attorney is Bill Levant, of Blue Bell, PA. ************************ DIRECTORY ASSISTANCE JUST 65 CENTS ONE OR TWO INQUIRIES CHARGED TO YOUR CREDIT CARD! REAL TIME, UP TO DATE! SPONSORED BY TELECOM DIGEST AND EASY411.COM SIGN UP AT http://www.easy411.com/telecomdigest ! ************************ --------------------------------------------------------------- Finally, the Digest is funded by gifts from generous readers such as yourself who provide funding in amounts deemed appropriate. Your help is important and appreciated. A suggested donation of fifty dollars per year per reader is considered appropriate. See our address above. Please make at least a single donation to cover the cost of processing your name to the mailing list. All opinions expressed herein are deemed to be those of the author. Any organizations listed are for identification purposes only and messages should not be considered any official expression by the organization. End of TELECOM Digest V23 #571 ****************************** From editor@telecom-digest.org Mon Nov 29 23:59:13 2004 Received: (from ptownson@localhost) by massis.lcs.mit.edu (8.11.6p3/8.11.6) id iAU4xD504792; Mon, 29 Nov 2004 23:59:13 -0500 (EST) Date: Mon, 29 Nov 2004 23:59:13 -0500 (EST) From: editor@telecom-digest.org Message-Id: <200411300459.iAU4xD504792@massis.lcs.mit.edu> X-Authentication-Warning: massis.lcs.mit.edu: ptownson set sender to editor@telecom-digest.org using -f To: ptownson Approved: patsnewlist Subject: TELECOM Digest V23 #572 TELECOM Digest Mon, 29 Nov 2004 23:59:00 EST Volume 23 : Issue 572 Inside This Issue: Editor: Patrick A. Townson Internet Phone Service Cuts Down on Interruptions (Lisa Minter) SBC VoIP Fee Furor Draws Eyes to BellSouth Program (Lisa Minter) This Service Will Be Ending as of Tomorrow (11/30/04) (Jack Decker) Re: This Service Will Be Ending as of Tomorrow (11/30/04) (John Bartley) Re: This Service Will Be Ending as of Tomorrow (Angela Epstein) VOIP News Closing Down (TELECOM Digest Editor) Data Communication Versus Telecommunications (Matt) Re: Calling Card Needed -- Short Interaction Sequence (Scott Dorsey) Re: Calling Card Needed -- Short Interaction Sequence (Clark Griswold) Re: WiFi Centrino RANGE Increase POSSIBLE? (Tony P.) Can't Find Linksys IP (BHAM KAL) Re: Dropping SBC For a VoIP Solution -- Vonage or Packet8 ?? (tgreen) Re: A Burglary Foiled by Calls That Didn't Reach 911 (Shlichter1) Pay-Per-Call Pricing Introduced for Live Telephone Answer (PressRelease) Re: Trial Shows How Spammers Operate (jdj) All contents here are copyrighted by Patrick Townson and the individual writers/correspondents. Articles may be used in other journals or newsgroups, provided the writer's name and the Digest are included in the fair use quote. By using -any name or email address- included herein for -any- reason other than responding to an article herein, you agree to pay a hundred dollars to the recipients of the email. =========================== Addresses herein are not to be added to any mailing list, nor to be sold or given away without explicit written consent. Chain letters, viruses, porn, spam, and miscellaneous junk are definitely unwelcome. We must fight spam for the same reason we fight crime: not because we are naive enough to believe that we will ever stamp it out, but because we do not want the kind of world that results when no one stands against crime. Geoffrey Welsh =========================== See the bottom of this issue for subscription and archive details and the name of our lawyer; other stuff of interest. ---------------------------------------------------------------------- From: Lisa Minter Date: Mon, 29 Nov 2004 11:55:27 -0500 Subject: Internet Phone Service Cuts Down on Interruptions http://www.newsday.com/business/printedition/ny-txgearbox4057038nov28,0,6782652.story?coll=ny-business-print BY JOHN MORAN THE HARTFORD COURANT Own a telephone, someone once said, and you give 6 billion people the right to wake you up in the middle of the night. Fortunately, most can't be bothered. But even that possibility highlights what a stupid and unruly brute the traditional telephone is. Someone calls, the phone rings, and you are bound to answer it -- or at least be interrupted by it. Internet telephone service -- otherwise known as voice over Internet protocol, or more simply VOIP -- promises to change all that, offering consumers sweeping and sophisticated control over how the phone works at an affordable price. Full story at: http://www.newsday.com/business/printedition/ny-txgearbox4057038nov28,0,6782652.story?coll=ny-business-print ------------------------------ From: Lisa Minter Date: Mon, 29 Nov 2004 17:58:29 -0500 Subject: SBC VoIP Fee Furor Draws Eyes to BellSouth Program http://news.com.com/SBC+VoIP+fee+furor+draws+eyes+to+BellSouth+program/2100-7352_3-5469926.html By Ben Charny Staff Writer, CNET News.com While local phone giant SBC drew considerable fire last week for a service offering to Internet telephony providers, fellow carrier BellSouth has been selling similar services for more than a year without any protest -- at least before the SBC furor. BellSouth began in mid-2003 to sell wholesale access services that let Internet phone service providers complete customer calls on BellSouth's local phone network. The service package raises the costs to Internet phone companies, which is what drew criticism when SBC unveiled its Tiptop service package late last week. The Tiptop furor included rare public criticism from Federal Communications Commission Chairman Michael Powell, who warned that the FCC would not tolerate local phone companies raising prices to hurt Internet telephony rivals. The debate has cast a spotlight on BellSouth's own offering. "It's fair to say that Chairman Powell was also sending a signal to BellSouth," an FCC spokesman said Monday. But there are several key differences keeping BellSouth's product in the good graces of regulators, while all but dooming the future of SBC's new offering -- differences that may help further sort out how Net phones will be regulated. "These are apples and oranges," a BellSouth spokesman said. [...] Tiptop apparently goes too far, according to several sources familiar with the FCC's perspective. While BellSouth's program for VoIP providers is just a service option, paying for Tiptop is the only way those providers can connect to SBC's network, according to the FCC. An FCC spokesman said on Monday that Tiptop created a large number of complaints from potential customers, while BellSouth's offering did not. Full story at: http://news.com.com/SBC+VoIP+fee+furor+draws+eyes+to+BellSouth+program/2100-7352_3-5469926.html ------------------------------ From: Jack Decker Date: Mon, 29 Nov 2004 18:34:34 -0500 Subject: VOIP News: This Service Will be Ending as of Tomorrow (11/30/04) Friends, I'm sorry to say that I have decided to put VoIP News on hiatus until further notice. When I started the list, back in the spring, there were few sources of VoIP news. Over the summer, many new sources of VoIP news have sprung up, and I feel that many (if not most of them) do a better job of tracking the industry than I do. Also, I am just one person. I had hoped that maybe others would contribute items to this list on a regular basis, but that never really happened. In the meantime, the number of news sources available has increased, and I find that I am spending far more time looking at VoIP news stories than I used to, and am enjoying it far less. It used to be that VoIP providers were constantly coming out with new features, or adding to areas of the country to their service area, or otherwise doing things that made VoIP an exciting industry to report on. I am sad to say that the momentum seems to have slowed in recent months, and I see few announcements that really make me want to stand up and cheer anymore (meanwhile large areas of my home state are still unserved by any VoIP provider, as far as having numbers for incoming calls is concerned). For those of you who want/need a daily fix of VoIP news, here is a link to a post from Jeff Pulver's blog that should help you out: http://192.246.69.231/jeff/personal/archives/001375.html Feel free to unsubscribe from the group, or stay on if you like -- should I see anything I consider positively earth-shattering in VoIP News I may still send it out, but expect future postings to be very infrequent (at least from me). Thanks for signing up for the group, and Happy Holidays. Jack [TELECOM Digest Editor's Note: My best regards to Jack Decker and thanks for the work he has done in the past year on his newsletter. Please note later in this issue a notice from myself describing a change in this Digest you are reading now intended to take in VOIP news submitted by our regular correspondents and others. PAT] ------------------------------ From: John Bartley or K7AAY@ARRL.NET Date: Mon, 29 Nov 2004 19:06:26 PST Subject: Re: VOIP News Will be Ending as of Tomorrow (11/30/04) Reply-To: VoIPnews@yahoogroups.com I can also recommend Patrick Townson's tightly moderated newsgroup, comp.dcom.telecom available for non-USENET users at http://groups.google.com/groups?&group=comp.dcom.telecom which has been very useful to me in exploring VOIP issues, as has the unmoderated comp.dcom.telecom.tech available at http://groups.google.com/groups?&group=comp.dcom.telecom.tech The best of luck to you, Jack. 73s and best regards, John Bartley K7AAY > Date: Mon, 29 Nov 2004 18:34:34 -0500 > From: Jack Decker > Subject: This service will be ending as of tomorrow (11/30/04) > Friends, > I'm sorry to say that I have decided to put VoIP News on hiatus until > further notice. When I started the list, back in the spring, there > were few sources of VoIP news. Over the summer, many new sources of > VoIP news have sprung up, and I feel that many (if not most of them) > do a better job of tracking the industry than I do. ------------------------------ From: Angela Epstein Date: Mon, 29 Nov 2004 22:37:26 -0500 Subject: Re: VoIP News Will be Ending as of Tomorrow Reply-To: VoIPnews@yahoogroups.com Jack - I enjoyed your news a lot! and benefited from them -- thanks for sharing your time. angela ------------------------------ Date: Mon, 29 Nov 2004 23:14:24 EST From: TELECOM Digest Editor Subject: VOIP News Closing Down As Jack Decker notes in another message in this issue, he is essentially closing down the Yahoo group 'VOIP News'. Effective December 1, 2004 this Digest you are reading now will be renamed 'TELECOM/VOIP Digest' and will include messages submitted submitted by readers of Jack's Digest -- those who wish to participate here. You'll see no basic changes here, just hopefully more issues of the Digest each day to accomodate an increasing number of messages pertaining to VOIP, which frankly, I believe is the telecom 'wave of the future'. Lisa Minter will continue as an associate here, and as the person maintaining the Yahoo group which will also be renamed 'TELECOM and VOIP Digest'. We will continue to have the weekly Canadian news summaries each Monday, the news summaries from USTA weekdays, the summaries from Monty Solomon and our other assortment of writers and features. I want 6to welcome the readers of VOIP News who decide to be part of this newsgroup, and encourage their participation. PAT ------------------------------ From: jrefactors@hotmail.com (Matt) Subject: Data Communication Versus Telecommunications Date: 29 Nov 2004 12:22:17 -0800 Organization: http://groups.google.com When people say telecommunications, it implies data communications, correct? I want to know if data communication and telecommunications usually are used interchangably. Please advise. thanks!! [TELECOM Digest Editor's Note: In the Usenet hierarchy, 'telecom' is one of the sub-groups under the larger category 'dcom'. I would say the two terms are mostly interchangeable, but data communications does include a lot more than just voice. PAT] ------------------------------ From: kludge@panix.com (Scott Dorsey) Subject: Re: Calling Card Needed -- Short Interaction Sequence Date: 29 Nov 2004 16:59:12 -0500 Organization: Former users of Netcom shell (1989-2000) Dr. Edward F Gehringer wrote: > Does anyone know (a) of a card with a competitive price that does not > have extra messages or prompts, beyond the access code and the phone > number, or (b) a place where I can obtain such information? The Working Assets Long Distance card is this way. I find the price rather high, personally, but it's not out of line with most of them. A portion of your bill does go to causes tending toward left of center if that bothers or appeals to you. --scott "C'est un Nagra. C'est suisse, et tres, tres precis." [TELECOM Digest Editor's Note: Dr. Gehringer can also check out a group I am affiliated with 'Friends of Independence' which brokers long distance from various carriers, and then contributes back a certain portion of the money to our local food pantry, animal shelter, and high school. Click on their ad in "Our Sponsors" on our web site http://telecom-digest.org . PAT] ------------------------------ From: Clark W. Griswold, Jr. Subject: Re: Calling Card Needed -- Short Interaction Sequence Date: Mon, 29 Nov 2004 13:01:56 -0700 Organization: Posted via Supernews, http://www.supernews.com Dr. Edward F Gehringer wrote: > Does anyone know (a) of a card with a competitive price that does not > have extra messages or prompts, beyond the access code and the phone > number, or (b) a place where I can obtain such information? The OfficeMax 1000 minute cards run 0.03/minute on sale, which is usually every other week. They are served by IDT and allow dial through the recorded prompt/advert messages. ------------------------------ From: Tony P. Subject: Re: WiFi Centrino RANGE Increase POSSIBLE? Organization: ATCC Date: Mon, 29 Nov 2004 17:29:02 -0500 In article , chipg_ 98NO@SPAMyahoo.com says: > Michal wrote in message > news:telecom23.563.3@telecom-digest.org: >> Hi, >> I have a Toshiba A50-101 which is Centrino (with Wifi of course) I'm >> using Wifi access point from Linksys named WAG54G. I need to use the >> computer on other floor than the access point is. It works really >> poor. The wifi range is not sufficient. Is it possible to increase my >> wifi range by using some sort of PCMCIA antenna or something? >> Thanks for any advice! >> Regards, >> Mike > Personally, I use an Avaya Wireless PC Card and find that my reception > is much better than using the integrated WiFi on my IBM Thinkpad > T-41. I am not real familiar with the PC model you mention but suspect > that you will find that a PC Card will work better. The Avaya Wireless > card I have also has a little jack on it which allows for attaching an > external antenna. > Hope this helps, I've found the Centrino equipped laptops we have at our office function quite well without any external antennae, etc. Ranges in excess of 300' are quite possible with these babies. ------------------------------ From: BHAM KAL Subject: Can't find Linksys IP Date: Mon, 29 Nov 2004 12:32:30 -0600 Hi, I am using Vonage at home. My Linksys wireless router is connected to Vonage unit and the Vonage unit is connected to the incoming cable modem. I have not logged into the wireless router in a while, now I forgot it's IP address, how do I find it? Thanks. ------------------------------ From: trb_1217@yahoo.com (tgreen) Subject: Re: Dropping SBC For a VoIP Solution -- Vonage or Packet8 ?? Date: 29 Nov 2004 15:07:32 -0800 Organization: http://groups.google.com rlangly@gmail.com (Ringo Langly) wrote in message news:: > charlie@cdsdetroit.com (charlie3) wrote in message > news:: >> I dropped my SBC home phone for Vonage last spring. I'm satisfied. I >> tested Vonage before dropping the SBC phone and waited until I had a >> cell phone that worked at home for backup (Verizon). There were a few >> hiccups and things to sort out but the service is a routine part of >> life now. >> Vonage lets me set things up to ring the cell and home phones >> simultaneously so either phone can be used to take a call. No one >> needs the cell phone number or even needs to know I have a cell phone. >> If my broad band connection goes down Vonage automatically forwards to >> the cell phone. The cell and vonage services are a powerful >> combination for me. >> Charlie > Hi Charlie, > Thanks for the review! I too like Vonage over Packet8, but Vonage > isn't in my local area yet. I thought about going ahead with Vonage > and getting a number from a nearby town (closest is about 30 miles > away), but long distance is still long distance for friends and family > in town. If Packet8 doesn't suit my needs I might still drop them and > go with Vonage anyway because I do like the perks Vonage has over > Packet8. > I'll know tomorrow as that's when the Packet8 device is set to arrive. > After that I'll post some reviews on how well it works. > Thanks and take care, > Ringo Ringo, I am looking forward to your review. I recently went through a similar VOIP company comparison and I settled on Sunrocket. They are a new company, but so far I have had a good experience. I tried them out because it seemed pretty risk free -- no sign up, activation, or cancellation charges. I hope you have a good experience. I think VOIP is going to get pretty big over the next year. ------------------------------ From: shlichter1@aol.com (Shlichter1) Date: 30 Nov 2004 01:02:55 GMT Organization: AOL http://www.aol.com Subject: Re: A Burglary Foiled by Calls That Didn't Reach 911 Tony P wrote: >> This is interesting. Verizon says there is all sorts of security yet >> there isn't any. I don't know about the old Bell Atlantic offices, but the Former GTE offices in California, Oregan, and Washington State have alarms, audio and video monitoring in them. They in the most part have electronic slider cards that are registered to the using company or CLEC employee. You most also turn the alarm off using a code, there are several different alarm codes that will further ID the person entering the building. Also most have separate doors for the Caged areas. When entering you may also have to contact the NOC or they may respond with Law Enforcement. As to the price of the cards, in 1999 Sprint in Las Veges had cards worth $20,000 each taken at gun point from one of their offices. The only good spammer is a dead one!! Have you hunted one down today? (c) I Kill Spammers, Inc. A Rot In Hell Company. Apple Elite II BBS will return. ------------------------------ Date: Tue, 30 Nov 2004 06:53:56 +0400 From: Editor Subject: Pay-Per-Call Pricing Introduced for Live Telephone Answering PRESS RELEASE NETWORK http://www.pressreleasenetwork.com Pay-Per-Call Pricing Introduced for Live Telephone Answering and Call Center Services Wilmington, DE - Nov 29, 2004 (PRN): 'Pay-Per-Call' (PPC) pricing for Live Telephone Answering and Call Center Services will radically improve Telephone Support Services for Small To Mid Size Companies. Brought forth by Front Office USA LLC, which is managed by a team that collectively has decades of experience with Telecom Technology, managing Call Centers and delivering Customer Service, the unique PPC pricing plans were formulated to offer a simpler and friendlier service for SMEs. Small Business, Contractors, Health Care providers use Telephone Answering Services for different business needs from Message Taking and Remote Receptionist to Order Taking, Service Dispatch, Enquiry Logging or Trouble Ticket Issuing functions. These businesses cannot afford a full time dedicated staff for such job functions and since these functions are carried out on a telephone; they are traditionally outsourced to an Answering Service. While traditional answering service providers want subscribers to enter into a commitment with them and ask for monthly call volume, the types of calls they get and the traffic hours; Aujoe Answering Service has introduced a unique pre-paid model, without any contract commitments and a transparent "pay per call" pricing. Aujoe offers plans where its subscribers get a price break on increasing call volume. The PPC pricing has been achieved by Aujoe by creation of defined call center handling processes for each business service and by automation of the entire signup and setup process thereby achieving significant efficiencies of scale and process management. The unique pricing model and the process driven call center services will help small and mid-size companies to service their customers more professionally and efficiently. Aujoe Answering Services brings the advantages to large outsourced call center services, typically enjoyed by Fortune 500 companies to the SMEs for the first time. By creating simpler, friendlier services and plans, Aujoe is saving its subscribers thousands of dollars every year while giving them access to the 'best in class practices' developed and practiced by large call outsourcing companies. About Front Office USA LLC Front Office USA is a provider of global 'Contact Management Services'. Front Office USA offers world-class teleservices that empower its subscribers to work more effectively and productively. All this can be achieved at significantly lower costs as compared to similar businesses still mired in traditional management methods, technologies and delivery models. Readers may learn more about Aujoe Answering Service through the website: http://www.aujoe.com. For more information, contact: Manuj Goyal, VP, Sales Front Office USA Tel: 212-300-0000 Email: mediarelations@frontofficeusa.com Website: http://www.aujoe.com Editor & CEO Press Release Network editor@pressreleasenetwork.com http://www.pressreleasenetwork.com ------------------------------ From: jdj Subject: Re: Trial Shows How Spammers Operate Date: Mon, 29 Nov 2004 19:56:11 -0800 Organization: Posted via Supernews, http://www.supernews.com On Sat, 27 Nov 2004 11:08:37 -0800, Steve Sobol wrote: > jdj wrote: >> Looks like Lycos has got the idea: > Riiiiight. Except it won't work, and DDoS'ing the site isn't cool > regardless of what kind of site it is. The article makes clear it is not ddos. You really should read the article. >> The Register reports that Lycos Europe is distributing a screensaver >> that is intended to drive traffic on a verified spam site up to very >> expensive levels: > Oh, and not only that, what happens the first time spam is sent out > advertising a website that someone wants to get in trouble? It's > happened before. Wrong again. You really need to read the article. ------------------------------ TELECOM Digest is an electronic journal devoted mostly but not exclusively to telecommunications topics. It is circulated anywhere there is email, in addition to various telecom forums on a variety of networks such as Compuserve and America On Line, Yahoo Groups, and other forums. It is also gatewayed to Usenet where it appears as the moderated newsgroup 'comp.dcom.telecom'. TELECOM Digest is a not-for-profit, mostly non-commercial educational service offered to the Internet by Patrick Townson. All the contents of the Digest are compilation-copyrighted. You may reprint articles in some other media on an occasional basis, but please attribute my work and that of the original author. Contact information: Patrick Townson/TELECOM Digest Post Office Box 50 Independence, KS 67301 Phone: 620-402-0134 Fax 1: 775-255-9970 Fax 2: 530-309-7234 Fax 3: 208-692-5145 Email: editor@telecom-digest.org Subscribe: telecom-subscribe@telecom-digest.org Unsubscribe:telecom-unsubscribe@telecom-digest.org This Digest is the oldest continuing e-journal about telecomm- unications on the Internet, having been founded in August, 1981 and published continuously since then. Our archives are available for your review/research. We believe we are the oldest e-zine/mailing list on the internet in any category! URL information: http://telecom-digest.org Anonymous FTP: mirror.lcs.mit.edu/telecom-archives/archives/ (or use our mirror site: ftp.epix.net/pub/telecom-archives) Email <==> FTP: telecom-archives@telecom-digest.org Send a simple, one line note to that automated address for a help file on how to use the automatic retrieval system for archives files. You can get desired files in email. ************************************************************************* * TELECOM Digest is partially funded by a grant from * * Judith Oppenheimer, President of ICB Inc. and purveyor of accurate * * 800 & Dot Com News, Intelligence, Analysis, and Consulting. * * http://ICBTollFree.com, http://1800TheExpert.com * * Views expressed herein should not be construed as representing * * views of Judith Oppenheimer or ICB Inc. * ************************************************************************* ICB Toll Free News. Contact information is not sold, rented or leased. One click a day feeds a person a meal. Go to http://www.thehungersite.com Copyright 2004 ICB, Inc. and TELECOM Digest. All rights reserved. Our attorney is Bill Levant, of Blue Bell, PA. ************************ DIRECTORY ASSISTANCE JUST 65 CENTS ONE OR TWO INQUIRIES CHARGED TO YOUR CREDIT CARD! REAL TIME, UP TO DATE! SPONSORED BY TELECOM DIGEST AND EASY411.COM SIGN UP AT http://www.easy411.com/telecomdigest ! ************************ --------------------------------------------------------------- Finally, the Digest is funded by gifts from generous readers such as yourself who provide funding in amounts deemed appropriate. Your help is important and appreciated. A suggested donation of fifty dollars per year per reader is considered appropriate. See our address above. Please make at least a single donation to cover the cost of processing your name to the mailing list. All opinions expressed herein are deemed to be those of the author. Any organizations listed are for identification purposes only and messages should not be considered any official expression by the organization. End of TELECOM Digest V23 #572 ****************************** From editor@telecom-digest.org Tue Nov 30 14:23:16 2004 Received: (from ptownson@localhost) by massis.lcs.mit.edu (8.11.6p3/8.11.6) id iAUJNGB12795; Tue, 30 Nov 2004 14:23:16 -0500 (EST) Date: Tue, 30 Nov 2004 14:23:16 -0500 (EST) From: editor@telecom-digest.org Message-Id: <200411301923.iAUJNGB12795@massis.lcs.mit.edu> X-Authentication-Warning: massis.lcs.mit.edu: ptownson set sender to editor@telecom-digest.org using -f To: ptownson Approved: patsnewlist Subject: TELECOM Digest V23 #573 TELECOM Digest Tue, 30 Nov 2004 14:23:00 EST Volume 23 : Issue 573 Inside This Issue: Editor: Patrick A. Townson CA DMV Chief Backs Tax by Mile (Monty Solomon) New DVR May Have Video on Demand (Monty Solomon) Internet Access, Delivered From Above (Monty Solomon) Digital Polycom Soundstations (Fred) How Do I Put Games on My E398 Motorola? (Zanziba) Audix Later Delivery (Tom Niesen) Fuses on Telephone Pole (Ned Protter) Call Bridge Program (Alex Wright) How is FTC v. NorVergence Proceeding? (Satchel Paige) Flat-Fee Option Enters Phoning by Web (Lisa Minter) Re: Pay-Per-Call Pricing For Live Telephone Answering (DevilsPGD) Re: Data Communication Versus Telecommunications (Justin Time) Re: New Treo 650 Is Better, But Rivals Offer Alternative (Owen Epstein) Re: WiFi Centrino RANGE Increase POSSIBLE? (Scott Dorsey) Re: Routing Problems To the Cayman Islands (Scott Dorsey) Re: Trial Shows How Spammers Operate (Scott Dorsey) Re: Trial Shows How Spammers Operate (Steve Sobol) Re: Can't Find Linksys IP (Paul A Lee) Re: International Fax From Vonage VOIP? (DevilsPGD) Re: VOIP News Shutting Down as of 11/30/04 (David Epstein) All contents here are copyrighted by Patrick Townson and the individual writers/correspondents. Articles may be used in other journals or newsgroups, provided the writer's name and the Digest are included in the fair use quote. By using -any name or email address- included herein for -any- reason other than responding to an article herein, you agree to pay a hundred dollars to the recipients of the email. =========================== Addresses herein are not to be added to any mailing list, nor to be sold or given away without explicit written consent. Chain letters, viruses, porn, spam, and miscellaneous junk are definitely unwelcome. We must fight spam for the same reason we fight crime: not because we are naive enough to believe that we will ever stamp it out, but because we do not want the kind of world that results when no one stands against crime. Geoffrey Welsh =========================== See the bottom of this issue for subscription and archive details and the name of our lawyer; other stuff of interest. ---------------------------------------------------------------------- Date: Tue, 30 Nov 2004 09:30:24 -0500 From: Monty Solomon Subject: CA DMV Chief Backs Tax by Mile New appointee has advocated a levy based on how much and where motorists drive. Idea is gaining support, but privacy advocates worry. By Robert Salladay Times Staff Writer SACRAMENTO - Gov. Arnold Schwarzenegger on Monday appointed a new Department of Motor Vehicles director who has advocated taxing motorists for every mile they drive -- by placing tracking devices in their cars. The idea would mean a significant overhaul of how California collects taxes to maintain its often-crumbling roads. Under the plan, the state gas tax -- now 18 cents a gallon -- would be replaced with a tax on every mile traveled by each car and truck. The notion has not been endorsed by Schwarzenegger but is gaining acceptance among transportation and budget experts. As Californians drive increasingly more fuel-efficient cars, state officials are alarmed that the gasoline tax will not raise enough money to keep up with road needs. Charging people for the miles they drive also worries some owners of hybrid cars, because it could wipe out any gas-tax savings they now enjoy. Dan Beal, managing director of public policy for the Automobile Club of Southern California, said altering the system would remove one incentive to buying new-technology hybrid cars like the Toyota Prius, because its owner would pay the same fuel tax as a Hummer owner. http://www.latimes.com/news/local/la-me-dmv16nov16,0,5985536.story ------------------------------ Date: Tue, 30 Nov 2004 10:05:57 -0500 From: Monty Solomon Subject: New DVR May Have Video on Demand By David Lieberman, USA TODAY NEW YORK - DirecTV is preparing to offer a digital video recorder (DVR) service in mid-2005 that could duplicate virtually every feature now available from current partner TiVo, plus provide video on demand similar to what's offered on cable, say executives of the company preparing the software. About the only TiVo function the new service will not have, they say, is the ability to jump over commercials. That's an unadvertised TiVo feature users can activate with programming instructions widely available on the Internet. http://www.usatoday.com/money/industries/technology/2004-11-29-dvr_x.htm ------------------------------ Date: Tue, 30 Nov 2004 10:41:02 -0500 From: Monty Solomon Subject: Internet Access, Delivered From Above By KEN BELSON Jeff Thompson may be afraid of heights, but he appears to be at home on the 81st-floor terrace of the Empire State Building. Overlooking the 1,000-foot drop, Mr. Thompson said he saw the entire New York metropolitan area as the battleground where his company, TowerStream, will challenge phone companies for high-speed Internet business customers by delivering fast, cheap service without digging up streets to install cables. Next to him, a TowerStream antenna, perched on the parapet, beamed high-powered wireless Internet connections to companies several miles away. This kind of aerial system, many technology experts say, could uncork the most nettlesome bottleneck in the telecommunications industry: the phone companies' control of the "last mile" of wire that travels from their switching stations to homes and offices. "We're competing against the Bells," Mr. Thompson said, "so we have to work quickly." Waving his arm toward the blaze of buildings and potential customers below, he said with a laugh, "This is when I get excited by heights." With 700 customers in five cities, TowerStream is the most active player in an emerging industry that sells a technology known as WiMax, or worldwide interoperability for microwave access. Unlike WiFi, the radio wave technology in airports and cafes that allows users to log on to the Internet from their laptop computers within 150 feet of an antenna, WiMax delivers broadband Internet connections through fixed antennas that send and receive signals across entire cities. http://www.nytimes.com/2004/11/29/technology/29max.html ------------------------------ Subject: Digital Polycom Soundstations Date: 30 Nov 2004 07:12:56 -0800 Organization: http://groups.google.com Has anyone been able to get a digital polycom soundstation to work using PBX authorization codes without having a 2616 plugged in with it to generate the calls? This seems to be the only way we can get it working, but is a pretty lame solution in executive boardrooms. Polycom has had a case open for three months yet has not been able to resolve for us. Thanks. ------------------------------ From: zanziba@flaming.force9.co.uk (Zanziba) Subject: How Do I Put Games on my E398 Motorola? Date: 30 Nov 2004 09:00:45 -0800 Organization: http://groups.google.com I have managed to source a couple of games off the net that work on Motorola phones. I don't seem to be able to get them from my laptop onto my phone. I do not have blue tooth on the laptop, but i will get a PCMCIA card if one is required. I have successfully connected via USB cable, and moved games onto the phone (Or is it the Flashcard???) into a directory called kjava that I found. This hasn't worked as I can't access them from the phone. Music that I move into the Audio folder works OK. If you know how to do this either by BT or by USB please give concise, clear instructions as I am not good a techy stuff. Thx. Zan ------------------------------ From: tjniesen@hotmail.com (Tom Niesen) Subject: Audix Later Delivery Date: 30 Nov 2004 09:47:47 -0800 Organization: http://groups.google.com Hello, I'm a part-time telecommunications administrator for a private college. My job includes switch and audix administration. My problem is this; For years we've had occasional complaints of late delivery of Audix messages. Sometimes a few days late, sometimes a few hours. It's hit and miss. On occasion, changing out the phone seems to fix the problem, other times it's switching ports that works out. I have a faculty member that is having an ongoing problem with late Audix delivery and none of the above has solved his issue. I did an archive search of the subject on Google but can't find too much written about it. Any suggestions? Tom Niesen ------------------------------ From: Ned Protter Subject: Fuses on Telephone Pole Date: Mon, 29 Nov 2004 23:46:46 -0500 Organization: Posted via Supernews, http://www.supernews.com On the utility pole across the street is a box, about 20 x 8 x 1.5". A telephone cable goes in and phone lines for the houses in the neighborhood come out. Six years ago I lost my telephone service when lightning struck. The phone man climbed to the box and replaced a fuse (or two). Has anybody else heard of those fuses? What is the box called? Where can I learn more? ------------------------------ From: alexwright321@altavista.com (alex wright) Subject: Call Bridge Program Date: 30 Nov 2004 01:39:31 -0800 Organization: http://groups.google.com I'm looking for a program that I could use with my VOIP. This is my only phone line in my home. I would like to call my home number with my cell and use Three-Way-Calling on my VOIP line to call long distance for free. Anything software available to do this? I've come accross this hardware box, but I figure a computer and a modem could do the same thing. http://www.sandman.com/autodial.html#UCH ------------------------------ From: dor@writeme.com (Satchel Paige) Subject: How is FTC v. NorVergence proceeding? Date: 29 Nov 2004 21:51:24 -0800 Organization: http://groups.google.com Does anyone have information on how the FTC's lawsuit aganist NorVergence is going? Have any court hearings taken place? Also, I have read that the Salzanos are no where to be found. However, I have also read that either Tom or Pete is starting a Conference Calling company. Does anyone know what is going on with them? ------------------------------ From: Lisa Minter Date: Tue, 30 Nov 2004 02:22:37 -0500 Subject: Flat-Fee Option Enters Phoning by Web Reply-To: VoIPnews@yahoogroups.com http://business.bostonherald.com/technologyNews/view.bg?articleid=56419 By Greg Gatlin SunRocket Inc., the latest Internet phone service provider to shoot into Boston's growing VoIP market, unveiled an annual $199 flat fee for home phone service yesterday. The privately held Vienna, Va. company's offer could heat up price wars emerging among increasing numbers of companies offering phone service through Voice over Internet Protocol. SunRocket says it's the first time a telecommunications company has offered such an annual flat fee. It says all charges are built in to that price, with no 'gotchas' or hidden fees that irk consumers when they open their phone bills. SunRocket says the deal includes unlimited domestic calling and numerous features such as call waiting, caller I.D. and enhanced voice mail. Up to 100 international minutes are included in the price. "Consumers are frustrated with the difference between what they thought they were going to pay and what they end up writing a check for," said Joyce Dorris, chief marketing officer. SunRocket's offer breaks down to $16.58 per month. Analysts say VoIP phone service providers are offering a wide range of prices, generally from about $20 a month to $35. Full story at: http://business.bostonherald.com/technologyNews/view.bg?articleid=56419 [TELECOM Editor's Note: Jack Decker has stated that his publication VOIP News is going into a hiatus starting later today. In order to fill the gap, this publication you are reading now will be taking on any VOIP messages sent by readers effective tomorrow. Our name will be changed to TELECOM/VOIP Digest. If you use any email filtering system based on subject headers, etc you may want to adjust your filters or whitelists to be TELECOM/VOIP rather than just TELECOM. And really, IMO, Voice over Internet *is* the way telecom is going in the future. An exciting new era for us. PAT] ------------------------------ From: DevilsPGD Subject: Re: Pay-Per-Call Pricing Introduced for Live Telephone Answering Date: Tue, 30 Nov 2004 03:58:16 -0700 Organization: Posted via Supernews, http://www.supernews.com In message Editor wrote: > Pay-Per-Call Pricing Introduced for Live Telephone Answering and Call > Center Services Dude! That is SO cool! I just need to figure out whether or not I can redirect my tollfree to a US DID and/or whether they're planning to offer Canadian DIDs ... Some people are like Slinkies ... You can't help but smile when you see one tumble down the stairs. ------------------------------ From: a_user2000@yahoo.com (Justin Time) Subject: Re: Data Communication Versus Telecommunications Date: 30 Nov 2004 06:04:34 -0800 Organization: http://groups.google.com jrefactors@hotmail.com (Matt) wrote in message news:: > When people say telecommunications, it implies data communications, > correct? I want to know if data communication and telecommunications > usually are used interchangably. > Please advise. thanks!! > [TELECOM Digest Editor's Note: In the Usenet hierarchy, 'telecom' is > one of the sub-groups under the larger category 'dcom'. I would say > the two terms are mostly interchangeable, but data communications > does include a lot more than just voice. PAT] The meaning would have to depend on the context. The more general term is telecommunications, having two major divisions, voice and data. The reason telecom -- voice is a sub-group of dcom -- data communications on the Internet newsgroups is due to the original focus of the Internet, computer-to-computer communications. As far as the history goes, data communications in the form of telegraphy pre-dates telephony or voice communications. My understanding of the word telecommunications is that it encompasses every form of communication that was carried by wire (before the age of wireless.) Rodgers Platt ------------------------------ From: owen.epstein@3gsoftphone.com (Owen P. Epstein) Subject: Re: New Treo 650 Is Better Than Ever, But Rivals Offer Alternatives Date: 30 Nov 2004 07:08:53 -0800 Organization: http://groups.google.com Monty Solomon wrote in message news:: > New Treo 650 Is Better Than Ever, But Rivals Offer Some Alternatives > By WALTER S. MOSSBERG > PalmOne's Treo smart phone has been the best combination of phone, PDA > and e-mail device on the market. It had a few key flaws, though, so > the company has now released a new, improved model, the Treo 650, to > be sold by Sprint starting next month. > But the rest of the industry is catching on to the idea of making a > phone that, like the Treo, actually has a full keyboard for banging > out e-mails. So the competition will be tougher for the new Treo than > it was for its predecessor. > Over the last week, I've been testing the new Treo 650, and comparing > it with two other PDA phones that have now morphed into models with > keyboards. One is the Microsoft-based Pocket PC phone. The other is > the Sony Ericsson P910 smart phone, based on the Symbian operating > system. I concentrated on the new keyboards in these two competitors > because that's their main new feature. I have already reviewed another > major Treo competitor, the new BlackBerry 7100t, sold by T-Mobile. > My verdict: The Treo is better than ever, but the two newest keyboard > phones, like the new BlackBerry, will give some new options to mobile > e-mail users who prefer different designs and different software. > http://ptech.wsj.com/archive/ptech-20041028.html Well you ust may be on to something but the market for Palm Treo is really hopping. What other PDA gives the same brilliance as the Treo? Thx, Owen Epstein ------------------------------ From: kludge@panix.com (Scott Dorsey) Subject: Re: WiFi Centrino RANGE Increase POSSIBLE? Date: 30 Nov 2004 10:33:09 -0500 Organization: Former users of Netcom shell (1989-2000) Tony P. wrote: > In article , chipg_ > 98NO@SPAMyahoo.com says: >> Michal wrote in message >> news:telecom23.563.3@telecom-digest.org: >>> I have a Toshiba A50-101 which is Centrino (with Wifi of course) I'm >>> using Wifi access point from Linksys named WAG54G. I need to use the >>> computer on other floor than the access point is. It works really >>> poor. The wifi range is not sufficient. Is it possible to increase my >>> wifi range by using some sort of PCMCIA antenna or something? What sort of internal WiFi card and antenna does it currently have? >> Personally, I use an Avaya Wireless PC Card and find that my reception >> is much better than using the integrated WiFi on my IBM Thinkpad >> T-41. I am not real familiar with the PC model you mention but suspect >> that you will find that a PC Card will work better. The Avaya Wireless >> card I have also has a little jack on it which allows for attaching an >> external antenna. What sort of internal WiFi card and antenna does the Thinkpad have? > I've found the Centrino equipped laptops we have at our office > function quite well without any external antennae, etc. Ranges in > excess of 300' are quite possible with these babies. What sort of internal WiFi card and antenna do these have? Guys, the level of performance between different cards is radically different. You can't just say "it's a centrino" and be saying anything relevant about the WiFi performance. If the original poster is getting rotten performance, a better card and antenna might be a big help. Then again, if he already has a decently performing one it might not be. --scott "C'est un Nagra. C'est suisse, et tres, tres precis." ------------------------------ From: kludge@panix.com (Scott Dorsey) Subject: Re: Routing Problems To the Cayman Islands Date: 30 Nov 2004 10:56:01 -0500 Organization: Former users of Netcom shell (1989-2000) Budwich wrote: > Let me understand this ... you test calls from a "all tier 1" carrier > coming in and there is no problem. AND they are "officially" the only > carriers allowed in (have either direct trunking / connections in or > coming thru a "gateway"). "Other" carriers ("non-official") that are > coming thru (have to be coming thru some gateway since you wouldn't > have direct groups to someone who isn't official ... right???) are > having problems. Why is this your problem? Is it not a gateway > issue? Sound "interesting" ... especially the "test numbers" ...:-) > good luck but I would go back to the gateway. It is clearly a gateway issue, but the problem is finding WHICH of the many gateways is malfunctioning. --scott "C'est un Nagra. C'est suisse, et tres, tres precis." ------------------------------ From: kludge@panix.com (Scott Dorsey) Subject: Re: Trial Shows How Spammers Operate Date: 30 Nov 2004 10:58:50 -0500 Organization: Former users of Netcom shell (1989-2000) T. Sean Weintz wrote: > Scott Dorsey wrote: >> In the case of the rule I gave, it will send a message to comcast's >> abuse address whenever mail sent from a dynamically-allocated comcast >> address arrives. There is NO REASON for anyone on a >> dynamically-allocated block to be sending mail directly; mail sent >> from Comcast users should go through their mail server and not from >> their direct address. So the only mail you will ever get from these >> blocks will be spam, mostly from zombie machines. > Not a good idea. Some of the addresses in the Comcast dynamic IP space > are NOT dynamic addesses, but DHCP reservations (that the customer pays > an extra $50 per month for) -- they are not leases -- the IP address is > reserved specifically for that users MAC address until Comcast manually > deletes it. And such addresses have a TOS/AUP that specifically allows > the user to run a mail server. So there IS a legit reason for some folks > to send mail directly from a Comcast IP. Right, these addresses are not in the same space, and they have different rDNS. Otherwise, DNSBLs which listed all dynamic space would be listing them as well. Part of the problem is that ISPs don't use any uniform naming system for addresses, so it can sometimes be a real adventure to figure out what a given address is until you figure out their naming scheme. And there are some out there that don't set any rDNS at all, too. --scott "C'est un Nagra. C'est suisse, et tres, tres precis." ------------------------------ From: Steve Sobol Subject: Re: Trial Shows How Spammers Operate Date: Mon, 29 Nov 2004 21:44:01 -0800 Organization: Glorb Internet Services, http://www.glorb.com jdj wrote: >> Riiiiight. Except it won't work, and DDoS'ing the site isn't cool >> regardless of what kind of site it is. > The article makes clear it is not ddos. Bull. The screensaver is meant to be installed on a lot of different computers that will be used to flood spammer sites with traffic. That's the textbook definition of a DDoS. Don't believe everything you read. > You really should read the article. I've read a number of articles on the topic. >> Oh, and not only that, what happens the first time spam is sent out >> advertising a website that someone wants to get in trouble? It's >> happened before. > Wrong again. Do tell...? JustThe.net Internet & New Media Services, http://JustThe.net/ Steven J. Sobol, Geek In Charge / 888.480.4NET (4638) / sjsobol@JustThe.net PGP Key available from your friendly local key server (0xE3AE35ED) Apple Valley, California Nothing scares me anymore. I have three kids. ------------------------------ From: Paul A Lee Subject: Re: Can't Find Linksys IP Date: Tue, 30 Nov 2004 11:51:53 -0500 Organization: Rite Aid Corporation In TELECOM Digest V23 #572, BHAM KAL wrote (in part): > I am using Vonage at home. My Linksys wireless router is=0D > connected to Vonage unit and the Vonage unit is connected to=0D > the incoming cable modem. I have not logged into the wireless=0D > router in a while, now I forgot it's IP address, how do I find it? The default IP address of the Linksys router is 192.168.1.1, and the default password is 'admin'. You should have changed the default password to help secure the router from unauthorized access. If you can't access the router at that address, or if you don't remember the password you set in the router, you can "cold boot" the router by pressing and holding the Reset button for about 10 seconds. The Reset button is recessed in a 1/8" round hole on the back panel of the router. Use a non-conductive tool to reach it. Note that this will clear all of the router's settings to their default values. Reach support documentation for your Linksys product at http://www.linksys.com/support/support.asp?action search. You can download PDF versions of user guides. Paul A Lee Sr Telecom Engineer Rite Aid Corporation HL-IS-COM (Telecomm) V: +1 717 730-8355 30 Hunter Lane, Camp Hill, PA 17011-2410 F: +1 717 975-3789 P.O. Box 3165, Harrisburg, PA 17105-3165 W: +1 717 805-6208 ------------------------------ From: DevilsPGD Subject: Re: International Fax From Vonage VOIP? Date: Mon, 29 Nov 2004 22:23:07 -0700 Organization: Posted via Supernews, http://www.supernews.com In message Hemant Shah wrote: > I am having problem sending fax to India from a Vonage Fax line. I can > send fax to anywhere in U.S. and receive fax from U.S. and India. I > have a Panasonic fax machine. If I use the auto dial on my fax machine > it times out and goes into re-dial mode because it takes long time for > Vonage to make the connection. I also tried to dial the number > manually and wait for the other fax machine to pickup and press start > button, but it does not make connection. > Is there something I can do with Vonage setting or my fax machine setting > so I can send fax to India through Vonage Fax line? > This could be a deal killer for me. I want to get rid of SBC, but I > also need to send fax to India. Try adding *99 in front of the number you dial. Beyond that there isn't much you can do. You can try an internet fax gateway though, that might be cheaper and more reliable. I read usenet for the articles. [TELECOM Digest Editor's Note: In addition to *99 in front of the number, add '#' as a terminator at the end to eliminate any time-outs wich may be wasting a few seconds in the dialing process. PAT] ------------------------------ From: David Epstein Date: Mon, 29 Nov 2004 22:55:33 -0500 Subject: Re: VoIP News Shutting Down Reply-To: VoIPnews@yahoogroups.com VOIP News will be missed. I've truly enjoyed your coverage. Thanks and come back soon! D- > From: VoIPnews@yahoogroups.com [mailto:VoIPnews@yahoogroups.com] > Sent: Monday, November 29, 2004 8:38 PM > To: VoIPnews@yahoogroups.com > Subject: [VoIP News] Digest Number 193 > 3. This service will be ending as of tomorrow (11/30/04) > From: Jack Decker > Date: Mon, 29 Nov 2004 18:34:34 -0500 > From: Jack Decker > Subject: This service will be ending as of tomorrow (11/30/04) > Friends, > I'm sorry to say that I have decided to put VoIP News on hiatus until > further notice. When I started the list, back in the spring, there were > few sources of VoIP news. Over the summer, many new sources of VoIP > news have sprung up, and I feel that many (if not most of them) do a > better job of tracking the industry than I do. > Also, I am just one person. I had hoped that maybe others would > contribute items to this list on a regular basis, but that never really > happened. In the meantime, the number of news sources available has > increased, and I find that I am spending far more time looking at VoIP > news stories than I used to, and am enjoying it far less. It used to be > that VoIP providers were constantly coming out with new features, or > adding to areas of the country to their service area, or otherwise doing > things that made VoIP an exciting industry to report on. > I am sad to say that the momentum seems to have slowed in recent months, > and I see few announcements that really make me want to stand up and > cheer anymore (meanwhile large areas of my home state are still unserved > by any VoIP provider, as far as having numbers for incoming calls is > concerned). [TELECOM Digest Editor's Note: I do feel VOIP is the 'wave of the future' where telecom is concerned, and will attempt to fill this gap in coverage by beginning to cover full time Voice over Internet stuff here for anyone who wishes to participate. Incidentally, I have been informed that the use of a slash mark '/' may not be agreeable to many file systems or mail servers, so for header purposes we will use 'TELECOM-VOIP Digest' rather than 'TELECOM/VOIP Digest'. All the usual features will continue, with Lisa Minter helping, but hopefully a lot of new stuff as well. Do stick around! PAT] ------------------------------ TELECOM Digest is an electronic journal devoted mostly but not exclusively to telecommunications topics. It is circulated anywhere there is email, in addition to various telecom forums on a variety of networks such as Compuserve and America On Line, Yahoo Groups, and other forums. It is also gatewayed to Usenet where it appears as the moderated newsgroup 'comp.dcom.telecom'. TELECOM Digest is a not-for-profit, mostly non-commercial educational service offered to the Internet by Patrick Townson. All the contents of the Digest are compilation-copyrighted. You may reprint articles in some other media on an occasional basis, but please attribute my work and that of the original author. Contact information: Patrick Townson/TELECOM Digest Post Office Box 50 Independence, KS 67301 Phone: 620-402-0134 Fax 1: 775-255-9970 Fax 2: 530-309-7234 Fax 3: 208-692-5145 Email: editor@telecom-digest.org Subscribe: telecom-subscribe@telecom-digest.org Unsubscribe:telecom-unsubscribe@telecom-digest.org This Digest is the oldest continuing e-journal about telecomm- unications on the Internet, having been founded in August, 1981 and published continuously since then. Our archives are available for your review/research. We believe we are the oldest e-zine/mailing list on the internet in any category! URL information: http://telecom-digest.org Anonymous FTP: mirror.lcs.mit.edu/telecom-archives/archives/ (or use our mirror site: ftp.epix.net/pub/telecom-archives) Email <==> FTP: telecom-archives@telecom-digest.org Send a simple, one line note to that automated address for a help file on how to use the automatic retrieval system for archives files. You can get desired files in email. ************************************************************************* * TELECOM Digest is partially funded by a grant from * * Judith Oppenheimer, President of ICB Inc. and purveyor of accurate * * 800 & Dot Com News, Intelligence, Analysis, and Consulting. * * http://ICBTollFree.com, http://1800TheExpert.com * * Views expressed herein should not be construed as representing * * views of Judith Oppenheimer or ICB Inc. * ************************************************************************* ICB Toll Free News. Contact information is not sold, rented or leased. One click a day feeds a person a meal. Go to http://www.thehungersite.com Copyright 2004 ICB, Inc. and TELECOM Digest. All rights reserved. Our attorney is Bill Levant, of Blue Bell, PA. ************************ DIRECTORY ASSISTANCE JUST 65 CENTS ONE OR TWO INQUIRIES CHARGED TO YOUR CREDIT CARD! REAL TIME, UP TO DATE! SPONSORED BY TELECOM DIGEST AND EASY411.COM SIGN UP AT http://www.easy411.com/telecomdigest ! ************************ --------------------------------------------------------------- Finally, the Digest is funded by gifts from generous readers such as yourself who provide funding in amounts deemed appropriate. Your help is important and appreciated. A suggested donation of fifty dollars per year per reader is considered appropriate. See our address above. Please make at least a single donation to cover the cost of processing your name to the mailing list. All opinions expressed herein are deemed to be those of the author. Any organizations listed are for identification purposes only and messages should not be considered any official expression by the organization. End of TELECOM Digest V23 #573 ****************************** From editor@telecom-digest.org Wed Dec 1 01:35:15 2004 Received: (from ptownson@localhost) by massis.lcs.mit.edu (8.11.6p3/8.11.6) id iB16ZFn18579; Wed, 1 Dec 2004 01:35:15 -0500 (EST) Date: Wed, 1 Dec 2004 01:35:15 -0500 (EST) From: editor@telecom-digest.org Message-Id: <200412010635.iB16ZFn18579@massis.lcs.mit.edu> X-Authentication-Warning: massis.lcs.mit.edu: ptownson set sender to editor@telecom-digest.org using -f To: ptownson Approved: patsnewlist Subject: TELECOM Digest V23 #574 TELECOM Digest Wed, 1 Dec 2004 01:35:00 EST Volume 23 : Issue 574 Inside This Issue: Editor: Patrick A. Townson Welcome to our VOIP News Readers (TELECOM Digest Editor) Cingular to Offer Faster Wireless Service (Monty Solomon) Britain's BT to Offer Movies, More via Internet (DailyLead from USTA) Re: Data Communication Versus Telecommunications (Al Gillis) Re: VOIP News Closing Down (Lisa Hancock) Re: Audix Later Delivery (Pete Romfh) Re: Can't Find Linksys IP (John R. Levine) Re: Can't Find Linksys IP (Barry Margolin) Re: Trial Shows How Spammers Operate (Geoffrey Welsh) Share Day for December, 2004 (TELECOM Digest Editor) Telecom and VOIP (Voice over Internet Protocol) Digest for the Internet. All contents here are copyrighted by Patrick Townson and the individual writers/correspondents. Articles may be used in other journals or newsgroups, provided the writer's name and the Digest are included in the fair use quote. By using -any name or email address- included herein for -any- reason other than responding to an article herein, you agree to pay a hundred dollars to the recipients of the email. =========================== Addresses herein are not to be added to any mailing list, nor to be sold or given away without explicit written consent. Chain letters, viruses, porn, spam, and miscellaneous junk are definitely unwelcome. We must fight spam for the same reason we fight crime: not because we are naive enough to believe that we will ever stamp it out, but because we do not want the kind of world that results when no one stands against crime. Geoffrey Welsh =========================== See the bottom of this issue for subscription and archive details and the name of our lawyer; other stuff of interest. ---------------------------------------------------------------------- Date: Wed, 01 Dec 2004 01:00:00 EST From: TELECOM Digest Editor Subject: Welcome to our VOIP News Readers This is just a short note to say hello to the VOIP News readers who have chosen to join us here at this Digest. Jack Decker did a great deal to raise public awareness of VOIP as a legitimate and useful way to communicate; a way that will, in the next few years by and large come to replace conventional telephony as we know it now. Please feel free to send messages here as you did with Jack Decker and VOIP News. Patrick Townson ------------------------------ Date: Tue, 30 Nov 2004 22:06:16 -0500 From: Monty Solomon Subject: Cingular to Offer Faster Wireless Service ATLANTA (AP) -- Cingular Wireless LLC will begin deploying a speedier wireless Internet service next year, a move made possible by the network capacity gained with the recent acquisition of AT&T Wireless as Cingular tries to catch up with to catch up with rivals led by Verizon Wireless. The nation's biggest cell phone company provided few details with Tuesday's announcement except to say it would launch the service in a "substantial" number of markets by the end of 2005 and "most" major markets by the end of 2006. Cingular already offers the new service in six cities where it had been launched by AT&T Wireless before its acquisition by Cingular in late October _ Dallas, Detroit, Phoenix, San Diego, San Francisco and Seattle _ but had yet to move beyond trials itself due to capacity constraints before the merger. The Atlanta-based company said the wireless technology it is using, known as third-generation or 3G, will offer average data speeds between 400 kilobits per second to 700 kilobits per second _ on par with entry-level DSL and cable broadband connections. That speed would be a shade faster than the high-speed service which Verizon already sells in 14 markets and which Sprint Corp. plans to begin rolling out by the end of this year. The Cingular-AT&T Wireless service is based on a technology known as "UMTS," while Verizon and Sprint are using a platform called EV-DO. ------------------------------ Date: Tue, 30 Nov 2004 14:49:38 EST From: Telecom dailyLead from USTA Subject: Britain's BT to Offer Movies and More via Internet Telecom dailyLead from USTA November 30, 2004 http://www.dailylead.com/latestIssue.jsp?i=17789&l=2017006 TODAY'S HEADLINES NEWS OF THE DAY * Britain's BT to offer movies and more via Internet BUSINESS & INDUSTRY WATCH * Fiedler named BellSouth COO * VoIP gear shipments up in Q3 * Cross Telecom enlists Pannway for video, VoIP rollout USTA SPOTLIGHT * SUPERCOMM: TIA's and USTA's Premiere Event EMERGING TECHNOLOGIES * Electronics makers begin production of broadband chip * Is IPTV the next big thing? REGULATORY & LEGISLATIVE * Verizon seeks compromise on Philadelphia Wi-Fi plan * Kazaa's owner outlines defense strategy * Phone companies struggle under current regulatory arrangement Follow the link below to read quick summaries of these stories and others. http://www.dailylead.com/latestIssue.jsp?i=17789&l=2017006 Legal and Privacy information at http://www.dailylead.com/about/privacy_legal.jsp SmartBrief, Inc. 1100 H ST NW, Suite 1000 Washington, DC 20005 ------------------------------ From: Al Gillis Subject: Re: Data Communication Versus Telecommunications Date: Tue, 30 Nov 2004 18:58:53 -0800 Organization: http://extra.newsguy.com Justin Time wrote in message news:telecom23.573.12@telecom-digest.org: > jrefactors@hotmail.com (Matt) wrote in message > news:: >> When people say telecommunications, it implies data communications, >> correct? I want to know if data communication and telecommunications >> usually are used interchangably. >> Please advise. thanks!! >> [TELECOM Digest Editor's Note: In the Usenet hierarchy, 'telecom' is >> one of the sub-groups under the larger category 'dcom'. I would say >> the two terms are mostly interchangeable, but data communications >> does include a lot more than just voice. PAT] > The meaning would have to depend on the context. The more general > term is telecommunications, having two major divisions, voice and > data. The reason telecom -- voice is a sub-group of dcom -- data > communications on the Internet newsgroups is due to the original focus > of the Internet, computer-to-computer communications. As far as the > history goes, data communications in the form of telegraphy pre-dates > telephony or voice communications. My understanding of the word > telecommunications is that it encompasses every form of communication > that was carried by wire (before the age of wireless.) > Rodgers Platt My views follow the logic expressed by Rodgers Platt ... I construe "Telecommunications" as electronic communications (or maybe even just electrical communications) of which there are a bunch of flavors: voice, data (either the old 1BM kind of data communications or the newer IP kind, made popular by Cisco, 3Com and that ilk), video (as in Video conferencing or even television) and possibly even Morse code! I've noticed that recently the "Data Boys" seem to think Telecom refers to voice-related communications. I think that's because they know little of the history of this art/science and they don't know the etymology of the word telecommunications. Per the Encyclopedia Britannica: Telecommunications: The science and practice of transmitting information by electromagnetic means. A wide variety of information can be transferred through a telecommunications system, including voice and music, still-frame ... So there! Al ------------------------------ From: hancock4@bbs.cpcn.com (Lisa Hancock) Subject: Re: VOIP News Closing Down Date: 30 Nov 2004 19:00:56 -0800 Organization: http://groups.google.com TELECOM Digest Editor wrote: > ... VOIP, which frankly, I believe is the telecom 'wave of the > future'. I hate to be a party pooper, it seems some basic questions remain to be answered about VOIP. Such as: 1) The mainstream press (plus my own experience) describe VOIP sound quality as _almost_ as good as a regular landline phone. When will it be 100% as good or better as landline 100% of the time? 2) The mainstream press says VOIP reliability still has a way to go, and is also dependent on the quality of the broadband connection one happens to be using. In data communications, it is very common to encounter "bunch-ups" when a lot of people just happen to hit their 'enter' key all at once; when this happens, there is a delay. For data transmission or internet use that is tolerable, but not on a voice conversation. It was like this in the early days of telephony when long distance lines were very limited and callers had to be queued for an available trunk. How and when will VOIP address this issue so that the reliability of VOIP is equal or better than landline 100% of the time? 3) The fact remains that VOIP usually needs the Baby Bells to deliver most of their calls. Despite what the FCC says, the Baby Bells are burdened with regulatory obligations, such as accomodating deadbeats and providing service to every location. I can't help but suspect the VOIP providers would not be interesting in running their cables or even providing service to high crime slum areas that the Baby Bells do support. Further, the Baby Bells have to have human service reps to handle customer complaints, ironically some coming from the possibility that VOIP providers failed to provide proper ANI and innundated customers with campaign calls (as recently described in this newsgroup). There have been some posts here recently complaining about long waits for service for some VOIP providers. It's one thing to be a novel new technology serving techo-geeks who can live with glitches. I suspect the high volume campaign callers didn't care if a percentage of calls failed to go through. But as the service expands into many people depending on the phone to make a living, such problems won't be tolerated. In my humble opinion, VOIP has a long way to go, further than its proponents recognize. [TELECOM Digest Editor's Note: So, there are a few shortomings still to be dealt with on VOIP. No one has ever claimed it was perfect; far from it. But the trade offs are worth considering. Like the Walmart versus the downtown store argument we had; some people may prefer its inexpensive cost and flexibilty over some of the traditional telecom 'advantages'. PAT] ------------------------------ From: Pete Romfh Subject: Re: Audix Later Delivery Date: Tue, 30 Nov 2004 22:29:36 -0600 Organization: Not Organized Tom Niesen wrote: > Hello, > I'm a part-time telecommunications administrator for a > private college. My job includes switch and audix > administration. My problem is this; For years we've had > occasional complaints of late delivery of Audix messages. > Sometimes a few days late, sometimes a few hours. It's > hit and miss. On occasion, changing out the phone seems > to fix the problem, other times it's switching ports that > works out. I have a faculty member that is having an > ongoing problem with late Audix delivery and none of the > above has solved his issue. > I did an archive search of the subject on Google but > can't find too much written about it. Any suggestions? > Tom Niesen Frequently the late delivery in Audix is due to the recipient's mailbox being full. You can display activity on the sender's and recipients mailboxes to see when it left the one and arrived in the other. Then do a List Measurements Subscriber Month and compare the maximum space used to the mailbox size. If the mailbox is full you can give them a larger mailbox, or check their mesage retention time and see if they are squirreling away messages. I had a user today who was complaining she wasn't getting messages. When I looked she had 385 old messages stored in her mailbox. She didn't know how to delete a message so she was just hitting # after every message to go to the next one. I educated the user and cleaned out her stored messages and she's fine now. Pete Romfh, Telecom Geek & Amateur Gourmet. promfh at hal dash pc dot org ------------------------------ From: johnl@iecc.com (John R. Levine) Subject: Re: Can't Find Linksys IP Date: 30 Nov 2004 21:06:48 -0500 Organization: I.E.C.C., Trumansburg NY USA >> I am using Vonage at home. My Linksys wireless router is=0D >> connected to Vonage unit and the Vonage unit is connected to=0D >> the incoming cable modem. I have not logged into the wireless=0D >> router in a while, now I forgot it's IP address, how do I find it? I had to corral a recalcitrant Linksys access point the other day, which I did by downloading and running the otherwise not very useful Windows setup program that Linksys provides. It uses some sort of undocumented broadcast scheme to find the Linksys box regardless of its IP address. On the other hand, if your router is doing NAT, as they all do, I would be amazed if it put itself anywhere other than 192,168.0.1 or 192.168.1.1. Failing that, another straightforward way to find it is to open the status window for the wireless connection on one of the client machines and see what address is listed as the gateway. On recent version of Windows, open the wireless from the network connection window, click on the Support tab and take a look. Whatever's listed for the gateway is the router. ------------------------------ From: Barry Margolin Subject: Re: Can't Find Linksys IP Organization: Symantec Date: Wed, 01 Dec 2004 00:23:01 -0500 In article , BHAM KAL wrote: > Hi, > I am using Vonage at home. My Linksys wireless router is connected to > Vonage unit and the Vonage unit is connected to the incoming cable > modem. I have not logged into the wireless router in a while, now I > forgot it's IP address, how do I find it? Connect a PC to a LAN port of the router, and configure it to get its network settings by DHCP. Then check its default gateway with "ipconfig". Barry Margolin, barmar@alum.mit.edu Arlington, MA *** PLEASE post questions in newsgroups, not directly to me *** ------------------------------ From: Geoffrey Welsh Subject: Re: Trial Shows How Spammers Operate Date: Wed, 1 Dec 2004 00:55:36 -0500 Steve Sobol wrote: > Bull. The screensaver is meant to be installed on a lot of different > computers that will be used to flood spammer sites with > traffic. That's the textbook definition of a DDoS. By your definition (or your textbook's), listing an interesting story on an aggregation site such as FARK - thus bringing many viewers who would not have otherwise viewed the page - would qualify as a DDOS attack. I suggest that a DDOS attack is one which intends to fill either the publisher's bandwidth or its servers' connection tables with the specific intent of making the site unavailable to as many visitors as possible. That's why they call is Denial Of Service; anything which does not attempt to prevent views by others is NOT a DDOS attack. I have installed the screen saver and, if anything, I'm disappointed in how little of the available bandwidth it uses. I am certain that I could manually generate more traffic to the spammers' web sites than the screen saver does -- if I didn't have to spend several minutes between each visit determining the next site to visit. This software seems specifically designed NOT to interfere with other visitors, but simply to generate a constant level of unprofitable traffic to a large number of sites based on the theory that the spammers are being charged for the traffic they generate -- which, if it is not always true, probably will become true when the spammers' hosts discover that these sites are now generating a significant volume of traffic. I could be generating revenue for a lot more spammers' web hosts, and I'd be glad to do it. The ultimate test, of course, would be to visit the sites reported by the screen saver to verify that they are still operational. If so, then the screen saver is at least an unsuccessful DDOS, if a DDOS at all. I suggest that you find a better textbook. Or collect some facts before claiming that what others (in this case, Lycos) write is a lie. Geoffrey Welsh ------------------------------ From: TELECOM Digest Editor Subject: Share Day For December Date: Wed, 01 Dec 2004 1:15:00 EST Instead of changing the Digest mailing list over to an advertising supported forum, I have always elected to keep it as a user supported forum, and for the most part keep it spam and virus free. I have been experimenting, not entirely successfully, with advertising through Google on the web site, but not the mailing list. I am *only* able to do this because of financial support from readers here, and if you would rather not see these messages every month, then please pitch in and help now and then! Consider it sort of like public radio, which goes on for days at a time trying to raise money ... and maybe I should adopt the same system. Turn over the entire Digest once or twice a year to fund raising (entire issues, etc) and stop doing it when the budget for the year has been raised. But for now, I will stick with the present system of devoting a few messages at the end of each month to raising money for the Digest publication expenses. Out of 400-500 messages per month, in a spam, virus free environment, two or three (only) devoted to fund raising. You know who you are; please provide some help here financially. You can use Pay Pal to donate with a credit/debit card by going to our web site http://telecom-digest.org and at the bottom of the home page look for the PayPal 'donate' button. Or if you prefer, send a check or money order to Patrick Townson/TELECOM, Post Office Box 50, Independence, Kansas 67301-0050. The amount you send is entirely up to you. You know best how much you can afford and whether or not this Digest has any value for you. Thank you very much. Patrick Townson, Editor/Publisher TELECOM Digest ------------------------------ TELECOM Digest is an electronic journal devoted mostly but not exclusively to telecommunications topics. It is circulated anywhere there is email, in addition to various telecom forums on a variety of networks such as Compuserve and America On Line, Yahoo Groups, and other forums. It is also gatewayed to Usenet where it appears as the moderated newsgroup 'comp.dcom.telecom'. TELECOM Digest is a not-for-profit, mostly non-commercial educational service offered to the Internet by Patrick Townson. All the contents of the Digest are compilation-copyrighted. You may reprint articles in some other media on an occasional basis, but please attribute my work and that of the original author. Contact information: Patrick Townson/TELECOM Digest Post Office Box 50 Independence, KS 67301 Phone: 620-402-0134 Fax 1: 775-255-9970 Fax 2: 530-309-7234 Fax 3: 208-692-5145 Email: editor@telecom-digest.org Subscribe: telecom-subscribe@telecom-digest.org Unsubscribe:telecom-unsubscribe@telecom-digest.org This Digest is the oldest continuing e-journal about telecomm- unications on the Internet, having been founded in August, 1981 and published continuously since then. Our archives are available for your review/research. We believe we are the oldest e-zine/mailing list on the internet in any category! URL information: http://telecom-digest.org Anonymous FTP: mirror.lcs.mit.edu/telecom-archives/archives/ (or use our mirror site: ftp.epix.net/pub/telecom-archives) Email <==> FTP: telecom-archives@telecom-digest.org Send a simple, one line note to that automated address for a help file on how to use the automatic retrieval system for archives files. You can get desired files in email. ************************************************************************* * TELECOM Digest is partially funded by a grant from * * Judith Oppenheimer, President of ICB Inc. and purveyor of accurate * * 800 & Dot Com News, Intelligence, Analysis, and Consulting. * * http://ICBTollFree.com, http://1800TheExpert.com * * Views expressed herein should not be construed as representing * * views of Judith Oppenheimer or ICB Inc. * ************************************************************************* ICB Toll Free News. Contact information is not sold, rented or leased. One click a day feeds a person a meal. Go to http://www.thehungersite.com Copyright 2004 ICB, Inc. and TELECOM Digest. All rights reserved. Our attorney is Bill Levant, of Blue Bell, PA. ************************ DIRECTORY ASSISTANCE JUST 65 CENTS ONE OR TWO INQUIRIES CHARGED TO YOUR CREDIT CARD! REAL TIME, UP TO DATE! SPONSORED BY TELECOM DIGEST AND EASY411.COM SIGN UP AT http://www.easy411.com/telecomdigest ! ************************ --------------------------------------------------------------- Finally, the Digest is funded by gifts from generous readers such as yourself who provide funding in amounts deemed appropriate. Your help is important and appreciated. A suggested donation of fifty dollars per year per reader is considered appropriate. See our address above. Please make at least a single donation to cover the cost of processing your name to the mailing list. All opinions expressed herein are deemed to be those of the author. Any organizations listed are for identification purposes only and messages should not be considered any official expression by the organization. End of TELECOM-VOIP Digest V23 #574 *********************************** From editor@telecom-digest.org Wed Dec 1 14:22:59 2004 Received: (from ptownson@localhost) by massis.lcs.mit.edu (8.11.6p3/8.11.6) id iB1JMwM26510; Wed, 1 Dec 2004 14:22:59 -0500 (EST) Date: Wed, 1 Dec 2004 14:22:59 -0500 (EST) From: editor@telecom-digest.org Message-Id: <200412011922.iB1JMwM26510@massis.lcs.mit.edu> X-Authentication-Warning: massis.lcs.mit.edu: ptownson set sender to editor@telecom-digest.org using -f To: ptownson Approved: patsnewlist Subject: TELECOM Digest V23 #575 TELECOM Digest Wed, 1 Dec 2004 14:22:00 EST Volume 23 : Issue 575 Inside This Issue: Editor: Patrick A. Townson Lycos Offers Spam-Server Attack Program (Lisa Minter) Professional Data Recovery Book (Tarun Tyagi) Ohio Lawmakers OK Bill That Sends Spammers to Jail (Lisa Minter) Internet Society Announces New Board Members (Internet Society) Cell Tower Shared Facility Agreements (John R Levine) 24-Hour Accurate Reverse Telephone Lookup Web Service (S Rockbridge) AuJoe Introduces Pay per Call Live Answering (Manuj Goyal) Internet Innovation Alliance: SBC's TipTOP Service Highlights (Minter) Re: Can't find Linksys IP (Rick Merrill) Re: Dropping SBC For a VoIP Solution - Vonage or Packet8 (Ringo Langly) Re: Data Communication Versus Telecommunications (Tom Niesen) Re: Trial Shows How Spammers Operate (T. Sean Weintz) Spam Gets Religion (TELECOM Digest Editor) Telecom and VOIP (Voice over Internet Protocol) Digest for the Internet. All contents here are copyrighted by Patrick Townson and the individual writers/correspondents. Articles may be used in other journals or newsgroups, provided the writer's name and the Digest are included in the fair use quote. By using -any name or email address- included herein for -any- reason other than responding to an article herein, you agree to pay a hundred dollars to the recipients of the email. =========================== Addresses herein are not to be added to any mailing list, nor to be sold or given away without explicit written consent. Chain letters, viruses, porn, spam, and miscellaneous junk are definitely unwelcome. We must fight spam for the same reason we fight crime: not because we are naive enough to believe that we will ever stamp it out, but because we do not want the kind of world that results when no one stands against crime. Geoffrey Welsh =========================== See the bottom of this issue for subscription and archive details and the name of our lawyer; other stuff of interest. ---------------------------------------------------------------------- From: Lisa Minter Subject: Lycos Offers Spam-Server Attack Program Date: Wed, 1 Dec 2004 11:47:38 EST MADRID, Spain - At the risk of breaching Internet civility, a European Web portal is offering its visitors a weapon against spam: a screensaver program that tries to choke spam servers by flooding them with junk traffic. As of Tuesday, about 65,000 people have signed up for the controversial tool from the German-based Lycos Europe, whose sites get 20 million users monthly. The company insists the technique is legal; it says the culprit servers are simply choked a bit, not completely asphyxiated; and dismissed concerns that its "Make Love not Spam" offensive can further clog the world's digital pipeline. Still, computer experts are worried. "You don't stop a bad thing by being bad yourself," said David Farber, former chief technologist at the U.S. Federal Communications Commission sites. "The idea of somebody coming and hitting you and you hitting back, you both end up very hurt. It just aggrevates an already serious problem." When a computer with the free Lycos screensaver is idle, the program sends junk commands to Web sites identified by Lycos as selling products pitched in spam. When done in masse, this eats up precious bandwidth, causing the sites to overload and slow down. The goal, said Lycos Europe spokesman Kay Oberbeck, is to "show the owners of such spam Web sites that there is massive interest of thousands of users who are not willing to just give up against more and more spam each day." The targets generally are not the servers used to do the actual mailings; these days, those servers are most often legitimate ones co-opted into spamming by viruses and worms. Lycos chooses its targets by reviewing lists of suspect sites identified by independent spam monitors such as SpamCop. The company said it checks each manually to make sure it genuinely carries products promoted by spam, though Oberbeck acknowledged the risk of going after a legitimate site that has been hijacked by a spam-spewing site. He said Lycos takes care not to crash spam servers altogether, ensuring that they will never go below 5 percent bandwidth. Thus, he said, the offensive isn't the same as denial-of-service attacks commonly used by hackers to incapacitate Web sites. Cyberspace activism such as virtual sit-ins in which computer users gang together and use automated tools to flood a Web site is not entirely new, said Dorothy Denning, a professor of defense analysis at the Navy Postgraduate School in Monterey, Calif. But in this case a for-profit company is the driving force. "The interesting question is whether or not that company might be liable under some law, and would probably be liable, certainly, at least under a lawsuit by the spammers," she said. Denning believes any impact on spamming will be minor at best. Though spam sites have to pay for bandwidth required for the extra traffic, she said, "the cost off adding extra bandwidth may be worth the reward that comes from spamming." *** FAIR USE NOTICE. This message contains copyrighted material the use of which has not been specifically authorized by the copyright owner. This Internet discussion group is making it available without profit to group members who have expressed a prior interest in receiving the included information in their efforts to advance the understanding of literary, educational, political, and economic issues, for non-profit research and educational purposes only. I believe that this constitutes a 'fair use' of the copyrighted material as provided for in section 107 of the U.S. Copyright Law. If you wish to use this copyrighted material for purposes of your own that go beyond 'fair use,' you must obtain permission from the copyright owner, in this instance, Reuters News Service. For more information go to: http://www.law.cornell.edu/uscode/17/107.shtml ------------------------------ From: tyagi_st@yahoo.com (Tarun Tyagi) Subject: Professional Data Recovery Book Date: 1 Dec 2004 08:52:46 -0800 Organization: http://groups.google.com Hi! I am glad to introduce World's First Book on Professional Data Recovery Programming. Book also Includes a FREE CD, which contains complete Source Codes of all the software/Programs described within the book and may interesting tools You can see the contents of the book and order Online on following link: http://www.DataDoctor.biz/author.htm The Details of the Book are as follows: Title of the book: "Data Recovery with & without Programming" Author of the book: Tarun Tyagi Publishers of the book: BPB Publications, New Delhi, India Number of Pages: 540 Size: (9.5 x 7.5 x 1.0) Inches ISBN: 81-7656-922-4 Price: $ 69.00 (Including Shipping Charge, Cost of Book and Other expenses) Enjoy Reading!! Regards, Tarun Tyagi J-110, Patel Nagar - 1, Ghaziabad (U.P.), India -201001 Cell: (+91)9868337762 http://www.DataDoctor.Biz ------------------------------ From: Lisa Minter Subject: Ohio Lawmakers OK Bill That Sends Spammers to Jail Date: Wed, 1 Dec 2004 11:41:04 EST SAN FRANCISCO (Reuters) - Ohio legislators sent an anti-spam bill to Gov. Bob Taft on Tuesday, with the aim of joining other U.S. states that have laws that put people who flood the Web with junk e-mail behind bars. The bill, first introduced in January and already approved by the state Senate, overwhelmingly passed the Ohio House of Representatives on Tuesday, said an aide to Rep. Kathleen Walcher, who co-sponsored the bill. Taft could not be immediately reached for comment. One industry source said the Ohio governor is expected to sign the bipartisan anti-spam bill. If signed into law, it would outlaw Internet ads that are deceptive or misleading and ban people from setting up false accounts to send spam, the junk e-mail that clogs consumers' online mailboxes and taxes the resources of Internet service providers. The measure would also allow the state attorney general to impose criminal and civil sanctions against spammers. The worst violators could face a minimum of six months in jail as well as fines of $25,000 per violation, or $2 to $8 million per conviction for violating e-mail. Their computer equipment could be confiscated, and Internet providers could sue for damages. AOL spokesman Nicholas Graham called the Ohio bill "one of the strongest anti-spam measures in the country." Graham said the bill is aimed only at the worst offenders who use fraud, deception and evasion to get their messages in front of consumers. "This is not meant to snag grandma sending her oatmeal cookie recipe," he said. AOL, a unit of Time Warner Inc. said it worked closely with the bill's sponsors. The Ohio bill was modeled after the federal CAN-SPAM Act but adds tougher penalties. Maryland has adopted an anti-spam law with criminal penalties and Virginia recently used its state law to send a North Carolina man to prison for sending hundreds of thousands of spam e-mail messages. ------------------------------ From: Internet Society Date: Wed, 1 Dec 2004 09:51:03 +0100 Subject: Internet Society Announces New Board Members Internet Society Announces New Board Members for Public Interest Registry Reston, VA - 29th November 2004 - The Internet Society (ISOC) today announced the selection and approval of three board members for the Public Interest Registry (PIR). Following expiry of her current term on the PIR board, Eva Frelich returns for a further three years. Susan Estrada and Barbara Fraser were elected to replace outgoing board members Frode Greisen and Kenny Huang, also for three year terms. "These appointments further strengthen PIR's unique position as the only registry dedicated to supporting the global noncommercial community," said Fred Baker, Chairman of the Board of Trustees of the Internet Society. Eva Frelich has a depth of experience in International forums including ITU, ETSI, ICANN, and CENTR. From 1998 to 2001 Eva acted as a Board Member for CENTR. In addition, Eva has worked for the incumbent Swedish Telecommunications Company Telia, NIC-SE the registry for the Swedish tld .se, and Neustar, the registry for .biz and .us. Susan Estrada, president of Aldea Communications, is the director of CENIC's One Gigabit or Bust Initiative. She is responsible for bringing together the interests of research, education, commerce, state and local government and the general public to develop an action plan for delivery of one gigabit broadband capabilities to every educational institution, business and home in California by 2010. She was also a founder of the Commercial Internet Exchange (CIX), a former area director for the Internet Engineering Software Group (IESG) and the Internet Engineering Task Force (IETF). Barbara Fraser is currently the Manager of the Security and Integrity Consulting Engineering Group for Cisco Systems, Inc. Her current activities and interests include improving IPsec protocols. She participates in Cisco's IPsec Steering Group, and is also an advisor to Cisco's product security incident response team (PSIRT). Barbara has a long experience as an active member of the Internet Engineering Task Force (IETF). Susan Estrada and Barbara Fraser are both former Trustees of the Internet Society. "I am delighted that Eva Frelich will continue her excellent work for PIR," said Lynn St. Amour, President and CEO of the Internet Society. "I also very much look forward to welcoming Susan and Barbara to the PIR Board - their extensive experience of supporting public interest initiatives will be of immense benefit to us as we plan PIR's future development." PIR is a not-for-profit organization that was created by ISOC to manage the .ORG top-level domain in an exemplary manner. PIR, which has a partnership with Ireland-based Afilias Ltd. to perform all technical services, is charged with overall responsibility for the .ORG registry and focuses particularly on the establishment of policies that support the .ORG community and help the domain name space evolve responsibly. Surpluses generated by PIR's .ORG domain registration revenues are allocated to the sponsorship of ISOC-managed public interest programs. The 2005 PIR Board consists of the following members: - Marc Rotenberg - Chairman - Amadeu Abril i Abril - Eva Frelich - Susan Estrada - Barbara Fraser - Geoff Huston - Glenn Ricart - Lynn St. Amour - Ex-officio ISOC liaison ABOUT ISOC The Internet Society (www.isoc.org) is a not-for-profit membership organization founded in 1991 to provide leadership in Internet related standards, education, and policy. With offices in Washington, DC, and Geneva, Switzerland, it is dedicated to ensuring the open development, evolution and use of the Internet for the benefit of people throughout the world. ISOC is the organizational home of the Internet Engineering Task Force (IETF) and other Internet-related bodies who together play a critical role in ensuring that the Internet develops in a stable and open manner. For over 13 years ISOC has run international network training programs for developing countries and these have played a vital role in setting up the Internet connections and networks in virtually every country connecting to the Internet during this time. ABOUT PIR Public Interest Registry (www.pir.org) is a not-for-profit corporation created by the Internet Society (ISOC) to manage the .ORG top-level domain. PIR's mission is to manage the .ORG domain in a manner that supports the continuing evolution of the Internet as a research, education and communications infrastructure, while educating and empowering the non-commercial community to most effectively utilize the Internet. PIR is based in Reston, Virginia. FOR FURTHER DETAILS: Internet Society: www.isoc.org Peter Godwin Communications Manager E-mail: godwin@isoc.org Internet Society 4, rue des Falaises 1205 Geneva Switzerland ------------------------------ Date: 1 Dec 2004 02:43:28 -0500 From: John R Levine Subject: Cellt Tower Shared Facility Agreements We're building a new water tower on top of which will be at least three and possibly as many as six wireless carrier antennas. Rather than have a ghetto of outbuildings, I'd rather put all their stuff into one larger building. They're OK with that, but we need to formalize the agreement. I'm looking for agreements about shared buildings in connection with cell towers. We have the tower leases, what we need is an add-on for shared buildings laying out the responsibility for maintenance, insurance, etc. All leads welcome. Agreements where the landlord is a municipality are particularly welcome. TIA and all that. Regards, John Levine johnl@iecc.com Primary Perpetrator of The Internet for Dummies, Information Superhighwayman wanna-be, http://iecc.com/johnl, Mayor "I dropped the toothpaste", said Tom, crestfallenly. ------------------------------ From: rockbridge@gmail.com (Sterling Rockbridge) Subject: 24-Hour Accurate Reverse Telephone Lookup Web Service Date: 1 Dec 2004 06:16:50 -0800 Organization: http://groups.google.com StrikeIron is offering a SOAP and REST based Web service that does live reverse telephone lookup that is accurate up to 24 hours, not a year old like some of the sites I've tried this on. Because it is a WSDL-based Web service, it can be built into applications and scripts. I believe they can go the other way too, from name/company and/or address to retrieving the phone number live again with 24 hours accuracy (live feed from phone companies) Any one try it? http://www.strikeiron.com/Search.aspx?SearchString=reverse%20phone%20lookup ------------------------------ From: Manuj Goyal Subject: Aujoe Introduces Pay-Per-Call Pricing for Live Phone Answering Date: Wed, 01 Dec 2004 12:00:00 EST Contact Name: Manuj Goyal, Front Office USA LLC Contact Phone: 212-300-0000 Web Address: http://www.aujoe.com/ Wilmington, DE - November 30, 2004 Aujoes Pay-Per-Call (PPC) pricing for Live Telephone Answering and Call Center Services will radically improve Telephone Support Services for Small To Mid Size Companies. Aujoe Answering Services, brought forth by Front Office USA LLC, is managed by a team that collectively has decades of experience with Telecom Technology, managing Call Centers and delivering Customer Service. The unique PPC pricing plans were formulated to offer a simpler and friendlier service for SMEs. Small Business, Contractors, Health Care providers use Telephone Answering Services for different business needs from Message Taking and Remote Receptionist to Order Taking, Service Dispatch, Enquiry Logging or Trouble Ticket Issuing functions. These businesses cannot afford a full time dedicated staff for such job functions and since these functions are carried out on a telephone; they are traditionally outsourced to an Answering Service. While traditional answering service providers want subscribers to enter into a commitment with them and ask for monthly call volume, the types of calls they get and the traffic hours; Aujoe Answering Service has introduced a unique pre-paid model, without any contract commitments and a transparent 'pay per call' pricing. Aujoe offers plans where its subscribers get a price break on increasing call volume. The PPC pricing has been achieved by Aujoe by creation of defined call center handling processes for each business service and by automation of the entire signup and setup process thereby achieving significant efficiencies of scale and process management. The unique pricing model and the process driven call center services will help small and mid-size companies to service their customers more professionally and efficiently. Aujoe Answering Services brings the advantages of large outsourced call center services, typically enjoyed by Fortune 500 companies to the SMEs for the first time. By creating simpler, friendlier services and plans, Aujoe is saving its subscribers thousands of dollars every year while giving them access to the best in class practices developed and practiced by large call outsourcing companies. About Front Office USA LLC Front Office USA is a provider of global 'Contact Management Services'. Front Office USA offers world-class teleservices that empower its subscribers to work more effectively and productively. All this can be achieved at significantly lower costs as compared to similar businesses still mired in traditional management methods, technologies and delivery models. Readers may learn more about Aujoe Answering Service through the website: http://www.aujoe.com/ For more information or an interview, please contact Manuj Goyal, VP, Sales at mediarelations@frontofficeusa.com or call 212-300-0000. ------------------------------ From: Lisa Minter Date: Wed, 01 Dec 2004 12:01:43 -0500 Subject: Internet Innovation Alliance: SBC's TipTOP Service Highlights Jack Decker Comment: I am no longer actively monitoring VoIP news per se, but this came up in my search of SBC-related news for the MI-Telecom group, hence the crosspost. This does NOT mean that the VoIP News has been reactivated, just that those who did not unsubscribe may receive a *very occasional* crosspost like this one, since it only takes me about two seconds to add an additional recipient. http://www.prnewswire.com/cgi-bin/stories.pl?ACCT=104&STORY=/www/story/11-30-2004/0002555213&STORY&EDATE= Internet Innovation Alliance: SBC's TipTOP Service Highlights Need for FCC Intervention WASHINGTON, Nov. 30 /PRNewswire/ -- The SBC was recently admonished in a strongly worded statement by FCC Chairman Powell for its efforts to charge Voice-over Internet Protocol (VoIP) providers higher access fees. SBC has been overly aggressive in state regulatory battles and has been acting in a manner inconsistent with statements made by the FCC on the issue of VoIP and emerging technologies. Chairman Michael Powell has made it clear publicly that he is committed to ensuring that the FCC avoid any action that might slow the "IP-services revolution." In response, the Internet Innovation Alliance (IIA), which was formed in part to prevent the very type of legacy regulations being levied by SBC, made the following statement: "SBC's charging of higher fees to VoIP providers through its TipTOP 'service' is discriminatory in nature and is a dangerous first step toward eradicating the vast array of benefits services like VoIP will provide to consumers," said Larry Irving, co-chair of IIA. "VoIP promises great consumer benefits provided it remains unburdened by regulations and access fees, like TipTOP. SBC apparently missed the memo or chose to ignore it in the face of larger profits." "The SBC has sent an unmistakable signal of defiance to the FCC," continued Bruce Mehlman, co-chair of IIA. "Chairman Powell has been clear that he does not intend to allow old copper-wire phone regulations to be applied to the newest digital data networks. SBC is picking a fight it cannot and should not win, and we expect the Commission to continue driving innovation through competition and non-regulation of VOIP." IIA believes that for America to realize broadband's revolutionary potential, federal and state officials must maintain regulatory and tax policies that encourage innovations made possible by mass-market broadband. IIA members include several VoIP leaders, including AT&T, pulver.com, Covad, Comptel/ASCENT, CapNet and the Information Technology Association of America. Other members include Americans for Tax Reform and the American Conservative Union. SOURCE Internet Innovation Alliance Web Site: http://www.internetinnovation.org ------------------------------ From: Rick Merrill Subject: Re: Can't Find Linksys IP Organization: Comcast Online Date: Wed, 01 Dec 2004 13:41:54 GMT BHAM KAL wrote: > Hi, > I am using Vonage at home. My Linksys wireless router is connected to > Vonage unit and the Vonage unit is connected to the incoming cable > modem. I have not logged into the wireless router in a while, now I > forgot it's IP address, how do I find it? > Thanks. 192.168.1.1 most likely ------------------------------ From: rlangly@gmail.com (Ringo Langly) Subject: Re: Dropping SBC For a VoIP Solution -- Vonage or Packet8 ?? Date: 1 Dec 2004 07:35:17 -0800 Organization: http://groups.google.com trb_1217@yahoo.com (tgreen) wrote in message news:: > Ringo, > I am looking forward to your review. I recently went through a similar > VOIP company comparison and I settled on Sunrocket. They are a new > company, but so far I have had a good experience. I tried them out > because it seemed pretty risk free -- no sign up, activation, or > cancellation charges. I hope you have a good experience. I think > VOIP is going to get pretty big over the next year. Hi everyone, Well last night the Packet8 router (or whatever it is) arrived, and in about 10 minutes it was activated and I had a dialtone. The first thing I did was run a speedtest on DSLReports.com, and I was sitting at around 2.4Mbps down and 350Kbps up (nothing else on network active), which is about normal for me. I made my first call to my landline (SBC), and the first thing I noticed was the delay. It was generally less then 1/2 a second, but it's enough where two people will step on one another while talking. I called the Packet8 tech support, and they said there generally is some delay, but it's should be no more then 50-100ms, which is hardly noticeable. Mine was more like 1/4-1/2 second delay. This doesn't sound like a biggie, but it breaks-up the casual flow of conversation. I then started firing-off some of my other applications, like iTunes (stream is 128K), Azureus (limited to 5K upload and 1500K download), email, and all my other web-based apps I usually run. With all this running I did another speed test, and I was down to about 1.1 Mbps down and 300Kbps up, which is still well within the 20Kbps or so required by Packet8. The sound quality is excellent, and caller ID, voicemail, and everything thus far works great. I even updated the firmware in the router, but the delay is still there. If anything is the killer it'll be the delay -- but I'll give it a full try for the next few weeks. I didn't sign any contract or anything, but it's free for the first month if I don't like it and send it back -- given I don't go over 300 minutes. The reasons I want to drop SBC is mainly because I'm paying $37/month and most VoIP services are closer to $20-$25/month. Plus my SBC line likes to quit working when it rains, and though I've told SBC exactly where the problem is they still haven't fixed it. Bottom line, the delay is annoying, but outside of that the service works great. I'll post another review later after I use it for a week or so. Ringo ------------------------------ From: tjniesen@hotmail.com (Tom Niesen) Subject: Re: Data Communication Versus Telecommunications Date: 1 Dec 2004 08:13:55 -0800 Organization: http://groups.google.com I guess I'm a 'data boy', but also 'phone boy'. Not that it matters to me but in my group we consider telecommunitcations to refer to the installation, use, service, and maintenance of telephones, systems, infrastructure, and related products. Data-com is refered to computer communications end of the field. Tom Al Gillis wrote in message news:: > Justin Time wrote in message > news:telecom23.573.12@telecom-digest.org: >> jrefactors@hotmail.com (Matt) wrote in message >> news:: >>> When people say telecommunications, it implies data communications, >>> correct? I want to know if data communication and telecommunications >>> usually are used interchangably. >>> Please advise. thanks!! >>> [TELECOM Digest Editor's Note: In the Usenet hierarchy, 'telecom' is >>> one of the sub-groups under the larger category 'dcom'. I would say >>> the two terms are mostly interchangeable, but data communications >>> does include a lot more than just voice. PAT] >> The meaning would have to depend on the context. The more general >> term is telecommunications, having two major divisions, voice and >> data. The reason telecom -- voice is a sub-group of dcom -- data >> communications on the Internet newsgroups is due to the original focus >> of the Internet, computer-to-computer communications. As far as the >> history goes, data communications in the form of telegraphy pre-dates >> telephony or voice communications. My understanding of the word >> telecommunications is that it encompasses every form of communication >> that was carried by wire (before the age of wireless.) >> Rodgers Platt > My views follow the logic expressed by Rodgers Platt ... I construe > "Telecommunications" as electronic communications (or maybe even just > electrical communications) of which there are a bunch of flavors: > voice, data (either the old 1BM kind of data communications or the > newer IP kind, made popular by Cisco, 3Com and that ilk), video (as in > Video conferencing or even television) and possibly even Morse code! > I've noticed that recently the "Data Boys" seem to think Telecom > refers to voice-related communications. I think that's because they > know little of the history of this art/science and they don't know the > etymology of the word telecommunications. > Per the Encyclopedia Britannica: > Telecommunications: The science and practice of transmitting > information by electromagnetic means. A wide variety of information > can be transferred through a telecommunications system, including > voice and music, still-frame ... > So there! > Al ------------------------------ From: T. Sean Weintz Subject: Re: Trial Shows How Spammers Operate Date: Wed, 01 Dec 2004 11:27:20 -0500 Organization: Posted via Supernews, http://www.supernews.com Scott Dorsey wrote: > Right, these addresses are not in the same space, and they have > different rDNS. Otherwise, DNSBLs which listed all dynamic space > would be listing them as well. Um, they ARE in the same space, and most DNSBLs that claim to list Comcast dynamic space DO list them, much to my frustration. > Part of the problem is that ISPs don't use any uniform naming system > for addresses, so it can sometimes be a real adventure to figure out > what a given address is until you figure out their naming scheme. And > there are some out there that don't set any rDNS at all, too. > --scott *Never* rely on rdns unless it's your own. ------------------------------ Date: Wed, 1 Dec 2004 08:52:05 PST From: Patrick Townson Subject: Spam Gets Religion By Dan Ilett E-mail recipients are increasingly being offered religious salvation through bulk, unsolicited e-mail. http://news.com.com/Spam+gets+religion/2100-1032_3-5459848.html?tag=sas.email Read all technology news from this week: http://www.news.com/thisweeksheadlines/ Copyright 2004 CNET Networks, Inc. All rights reserved. CNET Networks, Inc. 235 Second Street San Francisco, CA 94105 U.S.A. [TELECOM Digest Editor's Note: You may want to check this out. It seems the spam detection things are having a problem with religious mailing lists (validly ordered by netizens who wish to receive that sort of thing such as literature on line from Catholic publishers) and the scam things sent out by the person who wonders if they can interest you in helping them by taking a few million dollars off their hands to be used to assist 'christian good works' with charities as 'her late husband directed in his will', and some legitimate charities of a religious nature. The spam detection things are dumping it all, it seems; good, legitimate, bad, scam, whatever. Oh, and now just today I received a new twist on the 'please take this money off my hands' scam. The scammer/spammers are taking the legitimate email addresses of the **military guys** in Iraq and using them (the legitimate, but ill-gotten email addresses) to tell you how they have come across lots of money in Iraq (either buried in the rubble of one of the war sites or wherever) and can you help them by holding the money until they return to the USA, 'if I get back alive; if not *you* distribute the money for me.' Evil, evil, evil! If DDOS works to put these fools out of business, I say go for it. What the hell, email on the net has become mostly useless in the last few months anyway. PAT] ------------------------------ TELECOM Digest is an electronic journal devoted mostly but not exclusively to telecommunications topics. It is circulated anywhere there is email, in addition to various telecom forums on a variety of networks such as Compuserve and America On Line, Yahoo Groups, and other forums. It is also gatewayed to Usenet where it appears as the moderated newsgroup 'comp.dcom.telecom'. TELECOM Digest is a not-for-profit, mostly non-commercial educational service offered to the Internet by Patrick Townson. All the contents of the Digest are compilation-copyrighted. You may reprint articles in some other media on an occasional basis, but please attribute my work and that of the original author. Contact information: Patrick Townson/TELECOM Digest Post Office Box 50 Independence, KS 67301 Phone: 620-402-0134 Fax 1: 775-255-9970 Fax 2: 530-309-7234 Fax 3: 208-692-5145 Email: editor@telecom-digest.org Subscribe: telecom-subscribe@telecom-digest.org Unsubscribe:telecom-unsubscribe@telecom-digest.org This Digest is the oldest continuing e-journal about telecomm- unications on the Internet, having been founded in August, 1981 and published continuously since then. Our archives are available for your review/research. We believe we are the oldest e-zine/mailing list on the internet in any category! URL information: http://telecom-digest.org Anonymous FTP: mirror.lcs.mit.edu/telecom-archives/archives/ (or use our mirror site: ftp.epix.net/pub/telecom-archives) Email <==> FTP: telecom-archives@telecom-digest.org Send a simple, one line note to that automated address for a help file on how to use the automatic retrieval system for archives files. You can get desired files in email. ************************************************************************* * TELECOM Digest is partially funded by a grant from * * Judith Oppenheimer, President of ICB Inc. and purveyor of accurate * * 800 & Dot Com News, Intelligence, Analysis, and Consulting. * * http://ICBTollFree.com, http://1800TheExpert.com * * Views expressed herein should not be construed as representing * * views of Judith Oppenheimer or ICB Inc. * ************************************************************************* ICB Toll Free News. Contact information is not sold, rented or leased. One click a day feeds a person a meal. Go to http://www.thehungersite.com Copyright 2004 ICB, Inc. and TELECOM Digest. All rights reserved. Our attorney is Bill Levant, of Blue Bell, PA. ************************ DIRECTORY ASSISTANCE JUST 65 CENTS ONE OR TWO INQUIRIES CHARGED TO YOUR CREDIT CARD! REAL TIME, UP TO DATE! SPONSORED BY TELECOM DIGEST AND EASY411.COM SIGN UP AT http://www.easy411.com/telecomdigest ! ************************ --------------------------------------------------------------- Finally, the Digest is funded by gifts from generous readers such as yourself who provide funding in amounts deemed appropriate. Your help is important and appreciated. A suggested donation of fifty dollars per year per reader is considered appropriate. See our address above. Please make at least a single donation to cover the cost of processing your name to the mailing list. All opinions expressed herein are deemed to be those of the author. Any organizations listed are for identification purposes only and messages should not be considered any official expression by the organization. End of TELECOM Digest V23 #575 ****************************** From editor@telecom-digest.org Wed Dec 1 16:40:07 2004 Received: (from ptownson@localhost) by massis.lcs.mit.edu (8.11.6p3/8.11.6) id iB1Le7e28168; Wed, 1 Dec 2004 16:40:07 -0500 (EST) Date: Wed, 1 Dec 2004 16:40:07 -0500 (EST) From: editor@telecom-digest.org Message-Id: <200412012140.iB1Le7e28168@massis.lcs.mit.edu> X-Authentication-Warning: massis.lcs.mit.edu: ptownson set sender to editor@telecom-digest.org using -f To: ptownson Approved: patsnewlist Subject: TELECOM Digest V23 #576 TELECOM Digest Wed, 1 Dec 2004 16:40:00 EST Volume 23 : Issue 576 Inside This Issue: Editor: Patrick A. Townson China Blocking Access to Google News Site - Watchdog (Lisa Minter) Re: CA DMV Chief Backs Tax by Mile (Justin Time) Viper Networks VoIP (sorry_no_email@yahoo.com) Friendster, EHarmony Ink Exclusive Matchmaking Deal (Lisa Minter) 'Blog' Tops U.S. Dictionary's Words of the Year (Lisa Minter) Re: Trial Shows How Spammers Operate (Geoffrey Welsh) Re: Trial Shows How Spammers Operate (Steve Sobol) Re: Trial Shows How Spammers Operate (Scott Dorsey) Spam! VOIP is the Future, Make Millions From it (Brad McClain) Report: FTTP Growing by Leaps and Bounds (Telecom DailyLead From USTA) Re: AuJoe Introduces Pay Per Call (Steve Sobol) Lingo VOIP Sucks (Garth NoSpam) Re: Fuses on Telephone Pole (Fred) Hateful, Evil Spam! From: Marc in Iraq (marc whoever) Telecom and VOIP (Voice over Internet Protocol) Digest for the Internet. All contents here are copyrighted by Patrick Townson and the individual writers/correspondents. Articles may be used in other journals or newsgroups, provided the writer's name and the Digest are included in the fair use quote. By using -any name or email address- included herein for -any- reason other than responding to an article herein, you agree to pay a hundred dollars to the recipients of the email. =========================== Addresses herein are not to be added to any mailing list, nor to be sold or given away without explicit written consent. Chain letters, viruses, porn, spam, and miscellaneous junk are definitely unwelcome. We must fight spam for the same reason we fight crime: not because we are naive enough to believe that we will ever stamp it out, but because we do not want the kind of world that results when no one stands against crime. Geoffrey Welsh =========================== See the bottom of this issue for subscription and archive details and the name of our lawyer; other stuff of interest. ---------------------------------------------------------------------- From: Lisa Minter Subject: China Blocking Access to Google News Site - Watchdog Date: Wed, 1 Dec 2004 11:44:18 EST BEIJING (Reuters) - China is blocking access to the Web site Google News, media watchdog Reporters Without Borders said on Tuesday, and accused the U.S.-based company of being complicit by filtering its Chinese-language site. The Paris-based group said the government had been blocking Google's English-language Web site (www.news.google.com) for about 10 days, after the company launched a Chinese-language version that removed politically sensitive reports. Attempts by Reuters to access the site in China on Tuesday resulted in a search freeze. "China is censoring Google News to force Internet users to use the Chinese version of the site which has been purged of the most critical news reports," Reporters Without Borders said in a statement. "By agreeing to launch a news service that excludes publications disliked by the government, Google has let itself be used by Beijing," it said. Google News launched it its Chinese version in September and agreed not to list certain news on the site, Reporters Without Borders said. The practice is also common to popular Chinese Web portals, including Sina.com, Sohu.com and NetEase.com, which patrol their sites to delete politically sensitive comments. China's Internet market is expected to grow to 111 million subscribers by year-end and is considered a medium for free expression, but the government has in past jailed people for Web postings. It has also created a special cyber police force to monitor sites, servers and registrars. *** FAIR USE NOTICE. This message contains copyrighted material the use of which has not been specifically authorized by the copyright owner. This Internet discussion group is making it available without profit to group members who have expressed a prior interest in receiving the included information in their efforts to advance the understanding of literary, educational, political, and economic issues, for non-profit research and educational purposes only. I believe that this constitutes a 'fair use' of the copyrighted material as provided for in section 107 of the U.S. Copyright Law. If you wish to use this copyrighted material for purposes of your own that go beyond 'fair use,' you must obtain permission from the copyright owner, in this instance, Reuters News Service. For more information go to: http://www.law.cornell.edu/uscode/17/107.shtml ------------------------------ From: a_user2000@yahoo.com (Justin Time) Subject: Re: CA DMV Chief Backs Tax by Mile Date: 1 Dec 2004 09:52:38 -0800 Organization: http://groups.google.com Monty Solomon wrote in message news:: > New appointee has advocated a levy based on how much and where > motorists drive. Idea is gaining support, but privacy advocates worry. > By Robert Salladay > Times Staff Writer > SACRAMENTO - Gov. Arnold Schwarzenegger on Monday appointed a new > Department of Motor Vehicles director who has advocated taxing > motorists for every mile they drive -- by placing tracking devices in > their cars. > The idea would mean a significant overhaul of how California collects > taxes to maintain its often-crumbling roads. Under the plan, the state > gas tax -- now 18 cents a gallon -- would be replaced with a tax on > every mile traveled by each car and truck. > The notion has not been endorsed by Schwarzenegger but is gaining > acceptance among transportation and budget experts. As Californians > drive increasingly more fuel-efficient cars, state officials are > alarmed that the gasoline tax will not raise enough money to keep up > with road needs. > Charging people for the miles they drive also worries some owners of > hybrid cars, because it could wipe out any gas-tax savings they now > enjoy. > Dan Beal, managing director of public policy for the Automobile Club > of Southern California, said altering the system would remove one > incentive to buying new-technology hybrid cars like the Toyota Prius, > because its owner would pay the same fuel tax as a Hummer owner. > http://www.latimes.com/news/local/la-me-dmv16nov16,0,5985536.story Duhh! Somebody needs to teach this reporter about taxes and how they are levied and collected. "Charging people for the miles they drive also worries some owners of hybrid cars, because it could wipe out any gas-tax savings they now enjoy. Dan Beal, managing director of public policy for the Automobile Club of Southern California, said altering the system would remove one incentive to buying new-technology hybrid cars like the Toyota Prius, because its owner would pay the same fuel tax as a Hummer owner." "The idea would mean a significant overhaul of how California collects taxes to maintain its often-crumbling roads. Under the plan, the state gas tax -- now 18 cents a gallon -- would be replaced with a tax on every mile traveled by each car and truck." If the tax is on the gasoline the vehicle consumes, isn't the "fuel efficient" Prius paying the same 18 cents per gallon the "gas guzzler" Hummer pays or am I missing something here? I thought the savings came into play because the Prius used less gasoline - which is taxed - to travel the same distance than the Hummer. The consumer is not saving anything on the gas tax, they are saving because they consume less, that makes it a consumption tax. Now the plan being proposed is still a consumption tax, but instead of fuel they are proposing it on the amount of asphalt and concrete used. Just my thoughts. Rodgers Platt ------------------------------ From: sorry_no_email@yahoo.com Subject: Viper Networks VoIP Date: 1 Dec 2004 10:29:07 -0800 Organization: http://groups.google.com After a poor experience with a Lingo VoIP that I had to return because it never worked with my RCN cable modem service, I am hesitant to try the following product from Viper Networks: http://vipernetworks.com/xcart/customer/product.php?productid=1&cat=&page=# We call Ireland a lot and currently use a service called TBC Card that is 3 cents a minute. This Viper phone is less than that, and I like the fact you only pay for what you use. Funny thing is USA domestic calls are more than calls to Ireland. I guess the two main questions I have are would this work with our RCN cable modem service, and what happens if the company goes out of business. Are we just SOL? Not expecting any answers here, but I wanted to post for the record. BrianEWilliams ------------------------------ From: Lisa Minter Subject: Friendster, EHarmony Ink Exclusive Matchmaking Deal Date: Wed, 1 Dec 2004 11:42:36 EST SAN FRANCISCO (Reuters) - Online dating service eHarmony will provide exclusive matchmaking services to Friendster, an site that helps people meet for love or activities, the companies said on Tuesday. Picture Perfect How to choose the right mate. In October, eHarmony had 3.2 million unique visitors and was the fifth most-visited online dating site behind such providers as Yahoo Personals which had 6.2 million unique visitors, and the Match.com network, which had almost 5.5 million unique visitors, according to comScore Media Metrix. Friendster had 945,000 unique visitors in October, comScore said. The tie-up between eHarmony and Friendster comes as competition in the online dating sector intensifies, forcing sector participants to get bigger and find new ways to stand out in a crowd. Consumer spending on online personals was $325.3 million in the first half of 2004, up from $214.3 million in the first half of last year, according to the Online Publishers Association and comScore Networks. ------------------------------ From: Lisa Minter Subject: 'Blog' Tops U.S. Dictionary's Words of the Year Date: Wed, 1 Dec 2004 11:45:39 EST BOSTON (Reuters) - A four-letter term that came to symbolize the difference between old and new media during this year's presidential campaign tops U.S. dictionary publisher Merriam-Webster's list of the 10 words of the year. Merriam-Webster Inc. said on Tuesday that blog, defined as "a Web site that contains an online personal journal with reflections, comments and often hyperlinks," was one of the most looked-up words on its Internet sites this year. Eight entries on the publisher's top-10 list related to major news events, from the presidential election -- represented by words such as incumbent and partisan -- to natural phenomena such as hurricane and cicada. Springfield, Massachusetts-based Merriam-Webster compiles the list each year by taking the most researched words on its Web sites and then excluding perennials such as affect/effect and profanity. The company said most online dictionary queries were for uncommon terms, but people also turned to its Web sites for words in news headlines. "That is what occurred in this year's election cycle ... with voluminous hits for words like 'incumbent,' 'electoral,' 'partisan,' and, of course, our number one Word of the Year, 'blog,' " Merriam-Webster President and Publisher John Morse said in a statement. Americans called up blogs in droves for information and laughs ahead of the Nov. 2 presidential election. Freed from the constraints that govern traditional print and broadcast news organizations, blogs spread gossip while also serving as an outlet for people increasingly disenchanted with mainstream media. BLOG CLOUT It was mainly on blogs that readers first encountered speculation that President Bush wore a listening device during his first debate against Democrat John Kerry. The White House, forced to respond, called it a laughable, left-wing conspiracy theory. Bloggers also were among the first to cast doubt on a CBS television news report that challenged Bush's military service. CBS later admitted it had been duped into using questionable documents for the report. Last week CBS anchor Dan Rather said he would step down in March, although the network said the move was unconnected to the scandal. A Merriam-Webster spokesman said it was not possible to say how many times blog had been looked up on its Web sites but that from July onward, the word received tens of thousands of hits per month. Blog will be a new entry in the 2005 version of the Merriam-Webster Collegiate Dictionary, Eleventh Edition. The complete list of words of the year is available at http:/www.merriam-webster.com/info/04words.htm *** FAIR USE NOTICE. This message contains copyrighted material the use of which has not been specifically authorized by the copyright owner. This Internet discussion group is making it available without profit to group members who have expressed a prior interest in receiving the included information in their efforts to advance the understanding of literary, educational, political, and economic issues, for non-profit research and educational purposes only. I believe that this constitutes a 'fair use' of the copyrighted material as provided for in section 107 of the U.S. Copyright Law. If you wish to use this copyrighted material for purposes of your own that go beyond 'fair use,' you must obtain permission from the copyright owners, in this instance, Merriam Webster and Reuters News Service. For more information go to: http://www.law.cornell.edu/uscode/17/107.shtml ------------------------------ From: Geoffrey Welsh Subject: Re: Trial Shows How Spammers Operate Date: Wed, 1 Dec 2004 00:55:36 -0500 Steve Sobol wrote: > Bull. The screensaver is meant to be installed on a lot of different > computers that will be used to flood spammer sites with > traffic. That's the textbook definition of a DDoS. By your definition (or your textbook's), listing an interesting story on an aggregation site such as FARK -- thus bringing many viewers who would not have otherwise viewed the page -- would qualify as a DDOS attack. I suggest that a DDOS attack is one which intends to fill either the publisher's bandwidth or its servers' connection tables with the specific intent of making the site unavailable to as many visitors as possible. That's why they call is Denial Of Service; anything which does not attempt to prevent views by others is NOT a DDOS attack. I have installed the screen saver and, if anything, I'm disappointed in how little of the available bandwidth it uses. I am certain that I could manually generate more traffic to the spammers' web sites than the screen saver does -- if I didn't have to spend several minutes between each visit determining the next site to visit. This software seems specifically designed NOT to interfere with other visitors, but simply to generate a constant level of unprofitable traffic to a large number of sites based on the theory that the spammers are being charged for the traffic they generate -- which, if it is not always true, probably will become true when the spammers' hosts discover that these sites are now generating a significant volume of traffic. I could be generating revenue for a lot more spammers' web hosts, and I'd be glad to do it. The ultimate test, of course, would be to visit the sites reported by the screen saver to verify that they are still operational. If so, then the screen saver is at least an unsuccessful DDOS, if a DDOS at all. I suggest that you find a better textbook. Or collect some facts before claiming that what others (in this case, Lycos) write is a lie. Geoffrey Welsh ------------------------------ From: Steve Sobol Subject: Re: Trial Shows How Spammers Operate Date: Wed, 01 Dec 2004 11:36:57 -0800 Organization: Glorb Internet Services, http://www.glorb.com Geoffrey Welsh wrote: >> Bull. The screensaver is meant to be installed on a lot of different >> computers that will be used to flood spammer sites with >> traffic. That's the textbook definition of a DDoS. > attack. I suggest that a DDOS attack is one which intends to fill > either the publisher's bandwidth or its servers' connection tables > with the specific intent of making the site unavailable to as many > visitors as possible. You're right. I failed to include that one part of the definition. > That's why they call is Denial Of Service; > anything which does not attempt to prevent views by others is NOT a > DDOS attack. OK. > I have installed the screen saver and, if anything, I'm disappointed > in how little of the available bandwidth it uses. My guess is that one copy is not, by itself, supposed to generate enough traffic to raise any red flags at the ISP. JustThe.net Internet & New Media Services, http://JustThe.net/ Steven J. Sobol, Geek In Charge / 888.480.4NET (4638) / sjsobol@JustThe.net PGP Key available from your friendly local key server (0xE3AE35ED) Apple Valley, California Nothing scares me anymore. I have three kids. ------------------------------ From: kludge@panix.com (Scott Dorsey) Subject: Re: Trial Shows How Spammers Operate Date: 1 Dec 2004 16:09:07 -0500 Organization: Former users of Netcom shell (1989-2000) In article , Geoffrey Welsh wrote: > Steve Sobol wrote: >> Bull. The screensaver is meant to be installed on a lot of different >> computers that will be used to flood spammer sites with >> traffic. That's the textbook definition of a DDoS. > By your definition (or your textbook's), listing an interesting story > on an aggregation site such as FARK - thus bringing many viewers who > would not have otherwise viewed the page - would qualify as a DDOS > attack. I do not know about FARK. But you could make a good argument that getting a site listed on slashdot is tantamount to a DDOS. --scott "C'est un Nagra. C'est suisse, et tres, tres precis." ------------------------------ From: b_mcclain81@yahoo.com (Brad McClain) Subject: Spam! VoIP is the Future, Make Millions From It Date: 1 Dec 2004 12:13:07 -0800 Organization: http://groups.google.com Want to personally capitalize on a technology that hasn't yet hit the masses? It's VoIP-Voice over Internet Protocol. Be a part of Lightyear Communications, a full-scale telecommunications company, a major distributor of VoIP, residential phone service, long distance service, DSL, Dial-Up Internet, calling cards, and Wireless Contracts with T-mobile and Nextel. A famous radio personality Rick Dees and Chris Sullivan, the owner of Outback, Caraba's and other restaurants, have personally invested millions in this company. If they believe in this company so should you. Get involved in an incredible compensation plan. Earn money from monthly bills people are already paying. Listen to this informative 5 minute recording. Toll Free. 1-866-313-8647 Interested? Contact Brad McClain at b_mcClain81@yahoo.com Lightyear website: www.lightyearalliance.com [TELECOM Digest Editor's Note: Although this message, like about 80 percent of the net these days is *SPAM or SCAM*, I thought it worth noting here, since VOIP 'referrals' (another name for sales) is what I do. Oh, and I resell regular long distance as well, and directory assistance. The only 'incredible plan' I know of in telecom is in VOIP, and it is not all that great. I make 'referrals' on Vonage to people and I do not have to wait for the folks to actually use the phone and pay their bills to get my 'incredible compensation'. I get paid up front from Vonage with 'next month free' credits and although I do not figure on running out of that credit anytime soon, it is far from an 'incredible compensation plan'. All these people he names, allegedly investing millions of dollars (and implying that the casual reader of his spam will earn the same kind of money by getting involved) ... if anyone has yet to sign up with Vonage and wants to do so, they will get an e-coupon good for a month of free service by writing to me and asking. Write ptownson@massis.csail.mit.edu and ask for a Vonage e-coupon. PAT] ------------------------------ Date: Wed, 1 Dec 2004 14:15:43 EST From: Telecom dailyLead from USTA Subject: Report: FTTP Growing by Leaps and Bounds Telecom dailyLead from USTA December 1, 2004 http://www.dailylead.com/latestIssue.jsp?i=17815&l=2017006 TODAY'S HEADLINES NEWS OF THE DAY * Report: FTTP growing by leaps and bounds BUSINESS & INDUSTRY WATCH * Cingular to upgrade data network * ESPN to sell branded phone service with Sprint * Nokia gains share in handset market * Malone's Liberty Media Int'l takes control of Japan's Jupiter * Battle for core router dominance heats up * Telmex to spend $2.05 billion on network upgrade USTA SPOTLIGHT * Announcing Phone Facts Plus 2005 EMERGING TECHNOLOGIES * Here's my mobile, keep the change * "Incredibles" scores with high-tech marketing REGULATORY & LEGISLATIVE * Pennsylvania law restricts municipal telecom networks Follow the link below to read quick summaries of these stories and others. http://www.dailylead.com/latestIssue.jsp?i=17815&l=2017006 ------------------------------ From: Steve Sobol Subject: Re: Aujoe Introduces Pay-Per-Call Pricing for Live Phone Answering Date: Wed, 01 Dec 2004 11:38:50 -0800 Organization: Glorb Internet Services, http://www.glorb.com This is posted to Comp.Dcom.Telecom *and* CC'd via email to Manuj Goyal. Manuj Goyal wrote: > Contact Name: Manuj Goyal, Front Office USA LLC > Contact Phone: 212-300-0000 > Web Address: http://www.aujoe.com/ > Wilmington, DE - November 30, 2004 Aujoes Pay-Per-Call (PPC) > pricing for Live Telephone Answering and Call Center Services will > radically improve Telephone Support Services for Small To Mid Size > Companies. > Aujoe Answering Services, brought forth by Front Office USA LLC, is > managed by a team that collectively has decades of experience with > Telecom Technology, managing Call Centers and delivering Customer > Service. The unique PPC pricing plans were formulated to offer a > simpler and friendlier service for SMEs. Your service looks quite useful, but I have a nit to pick. It's not technically pay-per-call, is it? There is a per-minute fee involved too. JustThe.net Internet & New Media Services, http://JustThe.net/ Steven J. Sobol, Geek In Charge / 888.480.4NET (4638) / sjsobol@JustThe.net PGP Key available from your friendly local key server (0xE3AE35ED) Apple Valley, California Nothing scares me anymore. I have three kids. ------------------------------ From: garth@humboldt.net (Garth Nospam) Subject: Lingo Voip SUCKS! Date: 1 Dec 2004 12:06:53 -0800 Organization: http://groups.google.com LINGO SUCKS! I had two lines that I needed ported over to their service ... They strung me along for over the 30 day trial saying that they were working on it. Then they say Verizon is blocking access to the lines. I call Verizon they say that they would be happy to transfer my numbers and there is no blocking going on. I call Lingo back and they say they can't transfer my numbers due to technical limitations on their end! Then they charge me a $40 cancellation FEE!! Bastards! And they have no managers to talk with or even a mailing address! What crap. Also beware if you want to hook up a fax machine to their Voip box it has to be one that they support. Evil bastards Lingo needs to shape up get better customer service and maybe they will be worth it! ------------------------------ From: fbrack@apotex.com (Fred) Subject: Re: Fuses on Telephone Pole Date: 1 Dec 2004 11:27:47 -0800 Organization: http://groups.google.com Ned Protter wrote in message news:: > On the utility pole across the street is a box, about 20 x 8 x 1.5". > A telephone cable goes in and phone lines for the houses in the > neighborhood come out. > Six years ago I lost my telephone service when lightning struck. The > phone man climbed to the box and replaced a fuse (or two). > Has anybody else heard of those fuses? What is the box called? Where > can I learn more? That sounds like what is referred to as an outside plant terminal, probably a FC-25 or FC 50, if made by Northern Electric. It may or may not have had lightning protection, depending where you are located. More times than not, the lightning protection is at the entrance point to a residence or building, in what is referred to as a Protected Entrance Terminal (PET) or through "carbon protectors" in a small residential dmarc point. Any major telecom company will usually have an Outside Plant department or engineering group that designs and specifies these things. ------------------------------ Date: Wed, 1 Dec 2004 18:48:07 +0100 From: Marc Someone via TELECOM Digest Editor Subject: Hateful, Ugly Spam! Received in my inbox today; just one of several nasty spams: > Subject: From: Marc in Iraq > Dear Sir, > With a very desperate need for assistance, I have summed up courage > to contact you. > Presently stationed in Iraq with Army and I will disclose more to you > later, I found your contact particulars in an address journal. > I am seeking your assistance to evacuate the sum of $ > 28,500,000 (Twenty eight million, five hundred thousand dollars) to your > country or any other safe country of your choice, in as much as you can > assure me that my own share will be safe in your care until I complete > my service here. This is no stolen money, and there are no dangers > involved. > SOURCE OF MONEY: During the war some money in various currencies was > asked to be packed in barrels with piles of weapons and ammunitions at a > location near one of Saddam's old palaces during a rescue operation, and > it was agreed by all party present that the money will be shared amongst > us, this was quite an illegal thing to do, but I tell you what? no > compensation can make up for the risks we have taken with our lives in > this hell hole. > The above figure was given to me as my share, and to conceal this kind > of money became a problem for me, so with the help of a German > contact here,who of course did not know the real contents, I was able to > get the package out to a safe location entirely out of trouble spot. > I have now found a secured way of getting the package out to Europe > for you to pick up, and will discuss this with you when I am sure of > your sincerity in this. > I shall be compensating you with 2 Million Dollars on final conclusion > of this project, while the rest shall be for me.Your share stays with > you while the rest shall be for me for investment purposes. > One passionate appeal I will make to you is not to discuss this > matter with a third party, should you have reasons to reject this > offer,please destroy this mail as any leakage of this information will be > too bad for us. > I do not know for how long we will remain here, and I have survived 2 > suicide bomb attacks by the special grace of God, this and other > reasons I will mention later has prompted me to reach out for help, > since like many other soldiers here I may be killed sometime soon. I > honestly want this matter to be resolved immediately. > If this proposal is acceptable by you, do not take undue advantage of > the trust I have bestowed in you, I await your urgent mail so we > can discuss more. > Respectfully, > Marc Someone > ________________________________________________ > Inviato con : > TheCentreMail - http://www.thecentre.it [TELECOM Digest Editor's Note: Now isn't this an especially distasteful twist on the 'help me spend my money' letter? The reference to http://www.thecentre.it was left alone by me as was the first name 'Marc'. Do whatever you wish with it. Maybe some DDOS would be a good example for them? You can get a screensaver tool to do just that from Lycos. PAT] ------------------------------ TELECOM Digest is an electronic journal devoted mostly but not exclusively to telecommunications topics. It is circulated anywhere there is email, in addition to various telecom forums on a variety of networks such as Compuserve and America On Line, Yahoo Groups, and other forums. It is also gatewayed to Usenet where it appears as the moderated newsgroup 'comp.dcom.telecom'. TELECOM Digest is a not-for-profit, mostly non-commercial educational service offered to the Internet by Patrick Townson. All the contents of the Digest are compilation-copyrighted. You may reprint articles in some other media on an occasional basis, but please attribute my work and that of the original author. Contact information: Patrick Townson/TELECOM Digest Post Office Box 50 Independence, KS 67301 Phone: 620-402-0134 Fax 1: 775-255-9970 Fax 2: 530-309-7234 Fax 3: 208-692-5145 Email: editor@telecom-digest.org Subscribe: telecom-subscribe@telecom-digest.org Unsubscribe:telecom-unsubscribe@telecom-digest.org This Digest is the oldest continuing e-journal about telecomm- unications on the Internet, having been founded in August, 1981 and published continuously since then. Our archives are available for your review/research. We believe we are the oldest e-zine/mailing list on the internet in any category! URL information: http://telecom-digest.org Anonymous FTP: mirror.lcs.mit.edu/telecom-archives/archives/ (or use our mirror site: ftp.epix.net/pub/telecom-archives) Email <==> FTP: telecom-archives@telecom-digest.org Send a simple, one line note to that automated address for a help file on how to use the automatic retrieval system for archives files. You can get desired files in email. ************************************************************************* * TELECOM Digest is partially funded by a grant from * * Judith Oppenheimer, President of ICB Inc. and purveyor of accurate * * 800 & Dot Com News, Intelligence, Analysis, and Consulting. * * http://ICBTollFree.com, http://1800TheExpert.com * * Views expressed herein should not be construed as representing * * views of Judith Oppenheimer or ICB Inc. * ************************************************************************* ICB Toll Free News. Contact information is not sold, rented or leased. One click a day feeds a person a meal. Go to http://www.thehungersite.com Copyright 2004 ICB, Inc. and TELECOM Digest. All rights reserved. Our attorney is Bill Levant, of Blue Bell, PA. ************************ DIRECTORY ASSISTANCE JUST 65 CENTS ONE OR TWO INQUIRIES CHARGED TO YOUR CREDIT CARD! REAL TIME, UP TO DATE! SPONSORED BY TELECOM DIGEST AND EASY411.COM SIGN UP AT http://www.easy411.com/telecomdigest ! ************************ --------------------------------------------------------------- Finally, the Digest is funded by gifts from generous readers such as yourself who provide funding in amounts deemed appropriate. Your help is important and appreciated. A suggested donation of fifty dollars per year per reader is considered appropriate. See our address above. Please make at least a single donation to cover the cost of processing your name to the mailing list. All opinions expressed herein are deemed to be those of the author. Any organizations listed are for identification purposes only and messages should not be considered any official expression by the organization. End of TELECOM Digest V23 #576 ****************************** From editor@telecom-digest.org Thu Dec 2 22:16:02 2004 Received: (from ptownson@localhost) by massis.lcs.mit.edu (8.11.6p3/8.11.6) id iB33G1I13582; Thu, 2 Dec 2004 22:16:02 -0500 (EST) Date: Thu, 2 Dec 2004 22:16:02 -0500 (EST) From: editor@telecom-digest.org Message-Id: <200412030316.iB33G1I13582@massis.lcs.mit.edu> X-Authentication-Warning: massis.lcs.mit.edu: ptownson set sender to editor@telecom-digest.org using -f To: ptownson Approved: patsnewlist Subject: TELECOM Digest V23 #577 TELECOM Digest Thu, 2 Dec 2004 22:16:00 EST Volume 23 : Issue 577 Inside This Issue: Editor: Patrick A. Townson Judge Dismisses Some Claims Against Qwest (Lisa Minter) New Caller ID Technology to Block Unwanted Calls & Junk Faxes (Ken) Nortel BCM Phone Call Forward Feature (Ronald Gruia) Cisco PGW-2200 SS7 Solution (Shane Breen) Redback SMS 500 Router For Sale (SyncMan) GM Auto's InStar Phone System? (Al Dykes) Cingular Hops on the Fast Track (Telecom dailyLead from USTA) Review of VoicePulse (Lisa Minter) Obscure Phone Number Search (Marcus Jervis) NorVergence Bankrupty (David O. Rodriguez) Re: Hateful, Ugly Spam! (Rick Merrill) Re: Hateful, Ugly Spam! (Geoffrey Welsh) Re: CA DMV Chief Backs Tax by Mile (Linc Madison) Re: CA DMV Chief Backs Tax by Mile (Lisa Hancock) Re: Trial Shows How Spammers Operate (Ed Clarke) Re: Co-Location Facility Available (dand@thebvg.com) Re: Trial Shows How Spammers Operate (Geoffrey Welsh) Re: Ohio Lawmakers OK Bill That Sends Spammers to Jail (Rick Merrill) Re: Report: FTTP Growing by Leaps and Bounds (Rick Merrill) Re: Lingo Voip SUCKS! (Rick Merrill) Re: Dropping SBC For a VoIP Solution - Vonage or Packet8 (Ringo Langly) Re: VOIP News Closing Down (Becky) Telecom and VOIP (Voice over Internet Protocol) Digest for the Internet. All contents here are copyrighted by Patrick Townson and the individual writers/correspondents. Articles may be used in other journals or newsgroups, provided the writer's name and the Digest are included in the fair use quote. By using -any name or email address- included herein for -any- reason other than responding to an article herein, you agree to pay a hundred dollars to the recipients of the email. =========================== Addresses herein are not to be added to any mailing list, nor to be sold or given away without explicit written consent. Chain letters, viruses, porn, spam, and miscellaneous junk are definitely unwelcome. We must fight spam for the same reason we fight crime: not because we are naive enough to believe that we will ever stamp it out, but because we do not want the kind of world that results when no one stands against crime. Geoffrey Welsh =========================== See the bottom of this issue for subscription and archive details and the name of our lawyer; other stuff of interest. ---------------------------------------------------------------------- From: Lisa Minter Subject: Judge Dismisses Some Claims Against Qwest Date: Thu, 2 Dec 2004 13:33:56 -0500 (EST) DENVER - A federal judge has dismissed civil claims against a former president of Qwest Communications International Inc. and some allegations lodged against the telecommunications company in a lawsuit filed by investors. U.S. District Judge Robert Blackburn also threw out claims against a former sales executive but left intact allegations that Arthur Andersen's audit of Qwest's 1999 network capacity accounting was misleading. Blackburn ordered that other issues may go forward against Qwest, director Phil Anschutz and some former key executives, including former chief executive Joe Nacchio who has denied wrongdoing. The ruling made public late Wednesday came in a consolidated investors' lawsuit filed in 2001 accusing the company and its executives of misleading investors, and accounting and securities fraud. The dismissed claims were included in an amended complaint filed in February. That complaint added former president Afshin Mohebbi and former sales executive Gregory Casey. Attorney Thomas Egler, who represents the plaintiffs, declined comment Thursday. The Securities and Exchange Commission in 2002 accused Qwest's former managers of massive accounting fraud. Qwest has agreed to pay $250 million to investors to settle the SEC claims without admitting or denying the allegations. In 2003, Qwest erased more than $2.5 billion of revenues and profits from its 2000 and 2001 financial books. It also has put $750 million into reserve, including $250 million to pay the SEC fine, and has access to at least a portion of a $200 million insurance pool. Other company officials also may file claims on the insurance. The ruling came as Qwest has begun negotiating settlements of shareholder lawsuits. Blackburn said the additions of Mohebbi and Casey exceeded the scope of a previous order in the case. Among the claims he dismissed against Qwest were allegations that the company exaggerated the number of its wireless customers, improperly accounted for costs of a video DSL project, and engaged in practices related to putting unauthorized charges on a customer's bill. Still pending are claims that Qwest failed to properly disclose $222 million worth of asset depreciation and a change in its pension rate and improperly recognized revenue from some additional fiber-optic capacity deals in 1999. Blackburn also ruled that some claims against Arthur Andersen could proceed, including an allegation that Arthur Andersen's 2000 audit of Qwest's 1999 fiber-optic capacity deals was materially inaccurate. Arthur Andersen in part had argued that the allegations weren't made in a timely fashion. *** FAIR USE NOTICE. This message contains copyrighted material the use of which has not been specifically authorized by the copyright owner. This Internet discussion group is making it available without profit to group members who have expressed a prior interest in receiving the included information in their efforts to advance the understanding of literary, educational, political, and economic issues, for non-profit research and educational purposes only. I believe that this constitutes a 'fair use' of the copyrighted material as provided for in section 107 of the U.S. Copyright Law. If you wish to use this copyrighted material for purposes of your own that go beyond 'fair use,' you must obtain permission from the copyright owner, in this instance, Reuters News Service. For more information go to: http://www.law.cornell.edu/uscode/17/107.shtml ------------------------------ From: Ken@PrivacyCorps.com (Ken) Subject: New Caller ID Technology to Block Unwanted Calls & Junk Faxes Date: 2 Dec 2004 10:58:52 -0800 Organization: http://groups.google.com In response to numerous inquiries about loopholes in the 'Do Not Call' list and the volumes of junk faxes that are being received daily by consumers and businesses alike, we offer our latest press release for the Caller ID Manager:(www.privacycorps.com/products/?id=20) & FAXFIREWALL:(www.privacycorps.com/products/?id=23) NEW CALLER ID TECHNOLOGY BLOCKS UNWANTED CALLS AND JUNK FAXES Caller ID Manager and FAX FIREWALL Allows Only 'Invited' Callers to ring. Telemarketing companies and exempted groups may have found loopholes in the National "Do Not Call" List, but telecom automation provider Privacy Corps thwarts them again with their latest introductions, the Caller ID Manager and FAX FIREWALL. Both compact devices, designed for customers who subscribe to Caller ID, the Caller ID Manager and FAX FIREWALL allows only 'Invited' callers to ring the phone or fax. All other callers are handled as the consumer chooses. Although the devices are customizable, their use is simple. Callers on the consumer's 'Invited' list ring through without interference, while anonymous or unfamiliar callers are either ignored or allowed to leave a message, without ringing the phone. Callers on the consumer's 'Excluded' list cannot ring the phone or leave a message, including cell phone, out-of-state, and international callers. "We call it 'Caller ID with an Attitude!'," says Chase. "Now you can choose who can ring your phone or fax, and when, without the limits and extra monthly charges from your telephone service provider. Using the unit's Caller ID screen, it only takes a push of a button to add callers to the 175 entry 'Included' or 'Excluded' list. And, using the 'Wildcard' feature, the consumer can 'Invite' or 'Exclude' entire area codes, prefixes or number sets. Lists are so flexible that you can 'Invite' everyone and 'Exclude' some, or 'Exclude' everyone and 'Invite' some. "With these devices, intrusive calls and junk faxes are a thing of the past. Even Caller ID Spoofing is totally ineffective with this Caller ID technology." A snap to install, the Caller ID Manager completely eliminates telemarketing calls, predictive dialers, misdialed numbers, hang-up calls, junk faxes, pollsters, political organizations, ex's, creditors, harassment, and every other type of unwanted call. It can also be used as a pre-screening device for large telephone systems designed for business and institutional use, or as a qualifier for modems and remote telephone devices. Additional benefits include 'Do Not Disturb' modes. This feature prevents callers from ringing the phone during chosen hours, such as, bedtime, study or movie time, either on a one-time or daily basis. "The Caller ID Manager is particularly useful for people who keep unusual hours, such as those working the graveyard or swing shifts," says Chase. "During 'Do Not Disturb' hours, 'Invited' callers can leave a message, but the phone will not ring, ensuring total privacy." A secret emergency code is provided in case of emergencies. Based on the same platform, the FAX FIREWALL completely eliminates junk faxes, also by the use of an 'Invited' list, and ignores all others without answering the call. The Caller ID Manager and FAX FIREWALL are the latest additions to the Privacy Corps product line, designed to help residential consumers and business owners better manage their telephone communications and reduce monthly telephone charges. Both of these products are available at the website or by calling (888) 633-5777. (www.PrivacyCorps.com/pages/press.htm) ------------------------------ From: ronald.gruia@gmail.com (Ronald Gruia) Subject: Nortel BCM Phone Call Forward Feature Date: 2 Dec 2004 17:51:49 -0800 Organization: http://groups.google.com Hi everyone, I had a quick question re. programming the BCM phone (T7316). I want to call forward my phone to my external home phone number when I am working from home. On the manual, the description to forward a call is the Nortel key followed by 4 (to invoke the call forward feature). The display then shows: "Forward to:", and when I try to type 8 (the number to make an external call), the system does not even let me type the area code and number and automatically rings a bell and displays the message "invalid number". I believe that the only numbers that are being allowed for call forwarding are internal extensions (which, obviously, are no good in this situation). Can anyone suggest a work around or a way to set this up quickly? The folks from Bell that setup the system are already gone, so we would need to program this in. Thanks, Ronald [TELECOM Digest Editor's Note: Does your office phone have a speed dial function on it or any way to 'speed dial' your home number from memory? Try NortelKey 4 plus speed dial (your home number). In other words try 'quoting' your number inside another (acceptable to Nortel) key and see if that works. I know that with Javascript you can get away with a lot of c++ commands you could not use otherwise unless you 'quoted' them inside " and ' and { marks. Who knows, it may work with Nortel also. PAT] ------------------------------ From: shanebreen@comcast.net (Shane Breen) Subject: Cisco PGW-2200 SS7 Solution (www.doretel.com) Date: 2 Dec 2004 13:34:23 -0800 Organization: http://groups.google.com DORETEL Communications, Inc. has the following Cisco PGW-2200 SS7 Solution to sell: We can design, install and maintain your SS7 Solution here is some info that will help you better understand why and what the Cisco PGW-2200 can do for your company. The PGW 2200 is an essential component of a service provider''s strategy for migrating to emerging packet voice technologies. The Cisco PGW 2200 provides seamless interoperability between existing time-division multiplexing (TDM) switches and new packet networks, allowing providers to transition to more cost-effective and flexible services even while these new technologies continue to evolve. This seamless interoperability is achieved by introducing the power and dependability of SS7/C7 signaling for interconnect with the packet voice networks. The Cisco PGW 2200 allows providers to interconnect to the PSTN with more cost-effective intermachine trunks (IMT) and SS7 links. The Cisco PGW 2200 brings SS7/C7 signaling that provides significant infrastructure cost savings and time-to-market benefits over those using Primary Rate Interfaces (PRIs) or channel associated signaling (CAS) signaling. This creates an environment that improves a provider''s competitiveness and reduces operational costs. The Cisco PGW 2200, deployed with a voice gateway, also allows providers to deploy new revenue-generating services, such as PSTN access for business and residential packet voice applications. A provider also can sell hosted business services to a number of customers, gaining from economies of scale. All of these applications require a platform that bridges the old-world TDM networks with new world IP-based networks. In addition to operational cost savings and new services, the Cisco PGW 2200 provides a lower first port cost. The distributed nature of Voice over IP (VoIP) solutions allows service providers to deploy a single PGW 2200 and a small number of gateways, and expand as the demand grows. This flexible configuration of the PGW 2200 solutions is a key component of a service provider''s portfolio. It allows them to capitalize on market fluctuations by providing a cost-effective and rapid deployment vehicle. For more info please visit www.doretel.com We are a Cisco Partner. Solutions visit www.doretel.com** Shane Breen Doretel Communications, Inc. Director Of Sales & Marketing Office: 404.755.5721 Cell: 404.808.4022 Fax: 404.521.4639 sbreen@doretel.com AIM: shanebreen2003 www.doretel.com ------------------------------ From: SyncMan Subject: Redback SMS 500 Router For Sale Date: Thu, 2 Dec 2004 18:19:28 -0500 Organization: Bell Sympatico SMS-500 Redback router for sale. 19" rack 3RU size ; Its a plain shelf for support and training, dual DC -48V telecom power supplies, Forwarder Engine, Control Engine with moderate memory 100baseT Ethernet card, and slots 4&5 open. This is the telecom hub 48Vdc model, but I include a nice small ACDC power supply and AC cord in the bundle. The router is great for throttling, security ACL and ISP RADIUS authentication; working condition. The unit did operate in a 120 user conditions as a emergency repair replacement for 3-4 weeks in 2003 without a hiccup. One picture is stored at this url; http://www.vif.com/users/radcom/forsale/redback_sms500.jpg AOS txt capture here at this url; http://www.vif.com/users/radcom/forsale/redback_sms500.txt [serial/revision data] The things were $4000 at one time, but now I am taking reasonable offers rather than quote some out-of-context price stale-dated from ebay or trader forums. You pay for shipping/insurance, private sale, no tax. Contact JOHN (in Canada) 613-226-7980 Ext 233 or email r a d c o m (at) c a n a d a (dot) c o m for details. Do not auto-reply to this posting; I'm trying to hide from spam. ------------------------------ From: adykes@panix.com (Al Dykes) Subject: GM Auto's InStar Phone System? Date: 2 Dec 2004 20:35:39 -0500 Organization: PANIX -- Public Access Networks Corp. Whenever I hear an advert for a GM car that features the built-in phone system I wonder what kind of cell service they use. Someone here proably knows. ISTM that it's got to be analog, for the widest possible coverage, but I thought this was being phased sooner rather than later. What happens then ? a d y k e s @ p a n i x . c o m ------------------------------ Date: Thu, 2 Dec 2004 13:50:58 EST From: Telecom dailyLead from USTA Subject: Cingular Hops on the Fast Track Telecom dailyLead from USTA December 2, 2004 http://www.dailylead.com/latestIssue.jsp?i=17847&l=2017006 TODAY'S HEADLINES NEWS OF THE DAY * Cingular hops on the fast track BUSINESS & INDUSTRY WATCH * Verizon to sell Telus stake * U.K. cable firm NTL sells broadcast infrastructure for $2.3B * Global handset sales exceed 167 million units USTA SPOTLIGHT * Fill Your Most Urgent Job Requirements!! EMERGING TECHNOLOGIES * Broadband VoIP offers good price, but at a cost * Building an orderly Wi-Fi environment * Wall Street Journal launches mobile phone edition REGULATORY & LEGISLATIVE * Public telecom networks spark debate Follow the link below to read quick su mmaries of these stories and others. http://www.dailylead.com/latestIssue.jsp?i=17847&l=2017006 ------------------------------ From: Lisa Minter Date: Thu, 02 Dec 2004 15:09:05 -0500 Subject: Review of VoicePulse Jack Decker notes: There is a good review comparing VoicePulse with its chief competitor, Vonage, at this URL: http://reviews.designtechnica.com/review2139_intro10702.html As I've mentioned in the past, VoicePulse has the largest number of ratecenters in Michigan in which they offer numbers (among the VoIP companies that actually put their ratecenters served on their web site, anyway). So this review might be useful to some folks who are considering the VoIP option to keep those holiday phone bills down! ------------------------------ From: Marcus Jervis Subject: Obscure Phone Number Search Date: Thu, 02 Dec 2004 00:36:55 GMT Maybe this is a question for Carl Moore. This will seem weird, but I am looking for a non-toll-free North American phone number that when reverse-number searched on one of these telephone directory web sites, will produce a response of "Your search returned too many results" (the limit, which it must exceed, is 100 listings): www.411.com www.whitepages.com www.phonenumber.com Example: 800-638-2772 (except this is an 800 number. I need one with a non-800, 888, 877, etc NPA) Just click on Reverse Phone on any of the sites to test a number. The 800 number in the example here is for the Consumer Products Safety Commission, and it has over 100 locations listed in the telco database. So it is a long shot, but somehow I need to find a single non-toll-free number that does the same thing. A local pizza number that somehow yields 101 listings for delivery? Someone out there knows. ------------------------------ From: David O. Rodriguez Date: Wed, 01 Dec 2004 16:29:16 -0500 Subject: NorVergence Bankrupty Pat, Per an e-mail I received, the date to file claims for the NorVergence bankruptcy has been extended to Feb 28 2005 at 5:00PM EST. David ------------------------------ From: Rick Merrill Subject: Re: Hateful, Ugly Spam! Organization: Comcast Online Date: Thu, 02 Dec 2004 17:39:00 GMT Marc Someone via TELECOM Digest Editor wrote: > Received in my inbox today; just one of several nasty spams: >> Subject: From: Marc in Iraq >> Dear Sir, >> With a very desperate need for assistance, I have summed up courage >> to contact you. Next time you want to post a 419, post the FULL HEADERS please. [TELECOM Digest Editor's Note: Oh, I just did not think of it. I was more disgusted by him taking advantage of a soldier. PAT] ------------------------------ From: Geoffrey Welsh Subject: Re: Hateful, Ugly Spam! Date: Thu, 2 Dec 2004 16:54:55 -0500 Marc Someone via TELECOM Digest Editor wrote: > [TELECOM Digest Editor's Note: Now isn't this an especially > distasteful twist on the 'help me spend my money' letter? The > reference to http://www.thecentre.it was left alone by me as was > the first name 'Marc'. Do whatever you wish with it. Maybe some > DDOS would be a good example for them? You can get a screensaver > tool to do just that from Lycos. PAT] Patrick, I'm surprised at you! The web site displayed is almost certainly not the scammer's web site but a web mail service similar to Hotmail (well, actually, it looks like some kind of portal, but they probably offer free e-mail.) Most of these scams use free web mail services so the scammer doesn't have to operate their own, more traceable, mail server. Surely had it been Hotmail, you would have realized this and not suggested that it be targeted. Geoffrey Welsh [TELECOM Digest Editor's Note: Good point. Really though, I was more interested in helping get revenge for the poor guy whose name was confiscated. PAT] ------------------------------ Subject: Re: CA DMV Chief Backs Tax by Mile Date: Wed, 01 Dec 2004 16:47:59 -0800 From: Linc Madison Reply-To: lincmad@suespammers.org Organization: California resident; nospam; no unsolicited e-mail allowed In article , Justin Time wrote: > Duhh! Somebody needs to teach this reporter about taxes and how they > are levied and collected. No, actually, the reporter gives a clear and accurate picture of both the current system and the proposed change. > "Charging people for the miles they drive also worries some owners of > hybrid cars, because it could wipe out any gas-tax savings they now > enjoy [because they] would pay the same fuel tax as a Hummer owner." > If the tax is on the gasoline the vehicle consumes, isn't the "fuel > efficient" Prius paying the same 18 cents per gallon the "gas > guzzler" Hummer pays or am I missing something here? You're missing something here. Currently, the Prius owner pays less fuel tax than the Hummer owner per mile driven, because the Prius is more fuel-efficient. Under the proposed plan, the fuel tax would still be a fuel tax -- it would be collected at the pump when you buy gasoline -- but it would be based on miles driven, not gallons of fuel purchased. Also, the proposed tax scheme is not simply a consumption tax on the concrete and asphalt used, because the Hummer also consumes more of those per mile driven than the Prius, simply because it is much heavier and therefore causes more wear on the road surface. There's a fair correlation between fuel consumption and wear and tear caused by a vehicle, since both correlate with vehicle weight. Of course, this plan has zero chance of becoming law. There's no way that people will consent to have government monitoring devices installed in their cars, and the cost of installing the system would be enormous, even if the people were willing. Every vehicle and every gas pump would have to have some sort of device installed, and then there would need to be some sort of central computer system to oversee it all. Besides that, it would unfairly not tax people with out-of-state plates, even if they do all of their driving in California, and double-tax people with California tags who drive out of state and buy gasoline in another state. I once took a 12,000-mile road trip to Quebec and back; I shudder to think what my California fuel tax would have been on the first fill-up back in the state. If the current per-gallon fuel tax doesn't collect enough revenue to maintain the roads, then we need to raise the per-gallon fuel tax or find some other revenue source to augment the gasoline tax. It's that simple, except of course for the part about getting politicians to vote for something sensible but unpopular. Frankly, I'm astonished that anyone takes this per-mile plan seriously. Linc Madison * San Francisco, California * lincmad@suespammers.org * primary e-mail: Telecom at LincMad dot com All U.S. and California anti-spam laws apply, incl. CA BPC 17538.45(c) This text constitutes actual notice as required in BPC 17538.45(f)(3). DO NOT SEND UNSOLICITED E-MAIL TO THIS ADDRESS. You have been warned. ------------------------------ From: hancock4@bbs.cpcn.com (Lisa Hancock) Subject: Re: CA DMV Chief Backs Tax by Mile Date: 2 Dec 2004 12:37:01 -0800 Organization: http://groups.google.com Monty Solomon wrote: > The idea would mean a significant overhaul of how California collects > taxes to maintain its often-crumbling roads. Under the plan, the state > gas tax -- now 18 cents a gallon -- would be replaced with a tax on > every mile traveled by each car and truck. Sounds like it would be much easier to simply raise the gas tax. I can't help but wonder if they're even serious about this or if this is a joke. Putting tracking devices in every vehicle and then reading said devices would be enormously expensive and a bureacratic nightmare. How would such devices handle out of state driving? The critics are correct that a mileage tax would cease encouraging people to drive more fuel efficient cars. Like it or not, gas taxes have not kept up. Cars overall are more efficient than years ago -- things like front-wheel drive, fuel injection, and plastic instead of metal all improve efficiency. Also, the fuel tax does not go up for inflation. Road costs continually go up as well. Modern roads cost more as land costs go up, as well as more sophisticated safety and traffic features that are added to roads. This isn't a problem just in California but in all states. We like to drive and that costs money, an awful lot of it. Note that the great master highway builder, Robert Moses of NY, wrote that roads should be tolled and support costs -- police/fire/ rescue/traffic court -- should be included as a cost of running a road. Trains and buses are much more efficient in high density corridors, but the country has moved toward low-density sprawl in homes and workplaces which isn't good for transit use. Amtrak is carrying record ridership, but the govt wants to kill it off. We also have many more people going off in many directions as kids are shuttled between divorced parents, kids driving to school and then work/activities afterward, and both parents working and running errands. Before the big social changes of the 1970s there was less people driving as much since the wife could do her shopping in the daytime and the kids took the bus to school. I do think kids should be strongly discouraged from driving to school since there usually are schoolbuses or public transit to take them. They talk about telecommuting and a few people are doing it, but I don't see too much enthusiasm for the vast majority of workers. We had a fellow in poor health that wanted to telecommute but mgmt was not interested and they aren't encouraging the idea. Business still requires face-to-face for the good commuication. ------------------------------ From: Ed Clarke Subject: Re: Trial Shows How Spammers Operate Date: 1 Dec 2004 23:12:35 GMT Organization: Ciliophora Associates, Inc. Reply-To: clarke@cilia.org In article , T Sean Weintz wrote: > Scott Dorsey wrote: >> Right, these addresses are not in the same space, and they have >> different rDNS. Otherwise, DNSBLs which listed all dynamic space >> would be listing them as well. > Um, they ARE in the same space, and most DNSBLs that claim to list > Comcast dynamic space DO list them, much to my frustration. >> Part of the problem is that ISPs don't use any uniform naming system >> for addresses, so it can sometimes be a real adventure to figure out >> what a given address is until you figure out their naming scheme. And >> there are some out there that don't set any rDNS at all, too. As I recall, the lists of dynamic access space are provided by the ISP involved, not guessed at by someone else. If Comcast has provided these addresses to the list, then it's Comcast's problem/fault. ------------------------------ From: dand@thebvg.com Subject: Re: Co-Location Facility Available Date: 2 Dec 2004 04:47:24 -0800 Organization: http://groups.google.com Please contact me via email. dand@thebvg.com sueadu@gate.net wrote: > Dear Mr. Townson, > I am hoping you will be able to help me. I have a co-location > facility available with 100 pair lines. Do you deal with customers > in need of this type of facility? It is located in North Miami Beach > -- between Ft. Lauderdale and Miami. I've attached more details on > the specifications for you in this email. > Please let me know if you can help or not. If not, could you redirect > me to the correct person who handles this type of situation? > Thanking you in advance for your response, > ~ Sue Sirianni > Call Processing Systems, Inc. ------------------------------ From: Geoffrey Welsh Subject: Re: Trial Shows How Spammers Operate Date: Thu, 2 Dec 2004 09:41:38 -0500 After blasting Steve Sobol for making assumtions that observation of the screen saver didn't support, I have to admit that he was right. The site appeared to be down as I wrote my last tirade, but I can reach it now, and one of the pages on the site brags about how the response times of selected spammers' sites have increased. This is not admitting that the goal was DDoS, it was stupid because it escalates a war of immoral behavior and invites retribution from not only the spammers but also their web hosts and ISPs, some of which are in a country whose citizens have in the past engaged in a web defacement war against the West. I blasted Steven for not getting the facts, but I let some of my Utopian dreams infiltrate the 'facts' I presented, specifically that the campaign would do nothing more then increase the spammers' hosting bills and that their hosts and ISPs would not mind because the increased traffic also increased revenue without disruption. I have stopped using the screen saver on my Windoze machine. Geoffrey Welsh ------------------------------ From: Rick Merrill Subject: Re: Ohio Lawmakers OK Bill That Sends Spammers to Jail Organization: Comcast Online Date: Thu, 02 Dec 2004 17:30:40 GMT Lisa Minter wrote: > SAN FRANCISCO (Reuters) - Ohio legislators sent an anti-spam bill to > Gov. Bob Taft on Tuesday, with the aim of joining other U.S. states > that have laws that put people who flood the Web with junk e-mail > behind bars. A laudable effort, but it will only affect Ohio based spammers, will it not? A state cannot make a law affecting interstate, much less international traffic. I think they should concoct a bill that (like the Lycos attempt) would permit Ohio-based companies to "return fire" (i.e. spam or DOS the spammers) -- what is required is for the legislature to recognize a spammer registry: anyone registered by some due process criteria can then have their servers spammed and DOS'd by Ohio based servers: ALL OF THEM! .... > The worst violators could face a minimum of six months in jail as well > as fines of $25,000 per violation, or $2 to $8 million per conviction > for violating e-mail. Their computer equipment could be confiscated, > and Internet providers could sue for damages. Too bad that they would wind up punishing Ohio-based spammers who only spam out-of-state. > AOL spokesman Nicholas Graham called the Ohio bill "one of the > strongest anti-spam measures in the country." Graham said the bill is > aimed only at the worst offenders who use fraud, deception and evasion > to get their messages in front of consumers. There should be strong penalties for 419 and identity theft! e.g. they should permit the banks to stop all money to 419, etc. > "This is not meant to snag grandma sending her oatmeal cookie recipe," That's sweet, but irrelvant. > The Ohio bill was modeled after the federal CAN-SPAM Act but adds > tougher penalties. Maryland has adopted an anti-spam law with criminal > penalties and Virginia recently used its state law to send a North > Carolina man to prison for sending hundreds of thousands of spam > e-mail messages. It's a start! ------------------------------ From: Rick Merrill Subject: Re: Report: FTTP Growing by Leaps and Bounds Organization: Comcast Online Date: Thu, 02 Dec 2004 17:34:54 GMT Fl. County Halts FTTP Until Installation Is Safer "Warning: Deploying Verizon's new Fiber To The Premises (FTTP, see previous) in YOUR neighborhood may involve geysers of raw sewage spewing onto your front yard or sinkholes opening and swallowing moving vehicles. Well, Hillsborough County, host to one of the first FTTP trial sites, has ordered Verizon to stop deployment of FTTP until they can figure out how to stop creating sinkholes that open up under minivans with children inside. No word on whether SBC is having similar problems with their fiber roll-out." http://slashdot.org/article.pl?sid=04/11/17/1747208 Slashdot | Fl. County Halts FTTP Until Installation Is Safer Sounds like a little overreaction to me! - RM ------------------------------ From: Rick Merrill Subject: Re: Lingo Voip SUCKS! Organization: Comcast Online Date: Thu, 02 Dec 2004 17:43:11 GMT Garth Nospam wrote: > LINGO SUCKS! > I had two lines that I needed ported over to their service ... They > strung me along for over the 30 day trial saying that they were > working on it. Then they say Verizon is blocking access to the > lines. "Blocking" was the wrong word. If you look a matrix of all phone companies' numbers that are converted to another phone companies' system there is a complex number of dates at which the conversion (i.e. number portability) will begin. > I call Verizon they say that they would be happy to transfer > my numbers and there is no blocking going on. I call Lingo back and > they say they can't transfer my numbers due to technical limitations > on their end! Then they charge me a $40 cancellation FEE!! > Bastards! And they have no managers to talk with or even a mailing > address! What crap. Keep at 'em until they cough up a refund or a credit or ! a phone. > Also beware if you want to hook up a fax machine to their Voip box it > has to be one that they support. That's a good caution: Does anyone know more about FAX vs. VOIP? > Evil bastards Lingo needs to shape > up get better customer service and maybe they will be worth it! Keep hoping! ------------------------------ From: rlangly@gmail.com (Ringo Langly) Subject: Re: Dropping SBC For a VoIP Solution -- Vonage or Packet8 ?? Date: 2 Dec 2004 13:27:01 -0800 Organization: http://groups.google.com rlangly@gmail.com (Ringo Langly) wrote in message news:: > trb_1217@yahoo.com (tgreen) wrote in message > news:: >> Ringo, >> I am looking forward to your review. I recently went through a similar >> VOIP company comparison and I settled on Sunrocket. They are a new >> company, but so far I have had a good experience. I tried them out >> because it seemed pretty risk free -- no sign up, activation, or >> cancellation charges. I hope you have a good experience. I think >> VOIP is going to get pretty big over the next year. > Hi everyone, > Well last night the Packet8 router (or whatever it is) arrived, and in > about 10 minutes it was activated and I had a dialtone. The first > thing I did was run a speedtest on DSLReports.com, and I was sitting > at around 2.4Mbps down and 350Kbps up (nothing else on network > active), which is about normal for me. > I made my first call to my landline (SBC), and the first thing I > noticed was the delay. It was generally less then 1/2 a second, but > it's enough where two people will step on one another while talking. > I called the Packet8 tech support, and they said there generally is > some delay, but it's should be no more then 50-100ms, which is hardly > noticeable. Mine was more like 1/4-1/2 second delay. This doesn't > sound like a biggie, but it breaks-up the casual flow of conversation. > I then started firing-off some of my other applications, like iTunes > (stream is 128K), Azureus (limited to 5K upload and 1500K download), > email, and all my other web-based apps I usually run. With all this > running I did another speed test, and I was down to about 1.1 Mbps > down and 300Kbps up, which is still well within the 20Kbps or so > required by Packet8. > The sound quality is excellent, and caller ID, voicemail, and > everything thus far works great. I even updated the firmware in the > router, but the delay is still there. If anything is the killer it'll > be the delay -- but I'll give it a full try for the next few weeks. > I didn't sign any contract or anything, but it's free for the first > month if I don't like it and send it back -- given I don't go over 300 > minutes. The reasons I want to drop SBC is mainly because I'm paying > $37/month and most VoIP services are closer to $20-$25/month. Plus my > SBC line likes to quit working when it rains, and though I've told SBC > exactly where the problem is they still haven't fixed it. > Bottom line, the delay is annoying, but outside of that the service > works great. I'll post another review later after I use it for a week > or so. > Ringo Hi all, I have tried another feature offered by Packet8 that is rather bad ... They have the option to forward calls to another number if you're not at home, and in testing I forwarded calls to my work phone. From another phone in my office I called home and in about 3 rings my office line rang. Well, once I picked it up the delay was literally 2-3 seconds. I'm thinking the call goes from ma bell to Packet8 to the VoIP router at home then back to Packet8 then back to ma bell -- which creates a MAJOR delay. It's literally not worth using with such a delay. Once again other then the delays the service is great. And I know it's not my broadband because again during the test I had 300Kbps up and 1.5Mbps down according to DSL Reports. Ringo ------------------------------ From: beckcham_5@hotmail.com (becky) Subject: Re: VOIP News Closing Down Date: 2 Dec 2004 16:16:34 -0800 Organization: http://groups.google.com hancock4@bbs.cpcn.com (Lisa Hancock) wrote in message news:: > TELECOM Digest Editor wrote: >> ... VOIP, which frankly, I believe is the telecom 'wave of the >> future'. > I hate to be a party pooper, it seems some basic questions remain to > be answered about VOIP. Such as: > 1) The mainstream press (plus my own experience) describe VOIP sound > quality as _almost_ as good as a regular landline phone. When will it > be 100% as good or better as landline 100% of the time? > 2) The mainstream press says VOIP reliability still has a way to go, > and is also dependent on the quality of the broadband connection one > happens to be using. In data communications, it is very common to > encounter "bunch-ups" when a lot of people just happen to hit their > 'enter' key all at once; when this happens, there is a delay. For > data transmission or internet use that is tolerable, but not on a > voice conversation. It was like this in the early days of telephony > when long distance lines were very limited and callers had to be > queued for an available trunk. How and when will VOIP address this > issue so that the reliability of VOIP is equal or better than landline > 100% of the time? > 3) The fact remains that VOIP usually needs the Baby Bells to deliver > most of their calls. Despite what the FCC says, the Baby Bells are > burdened with regulatory obligations, such as accomodating deadbeats > and providing service to every location. I can't help but suspect the > VOIP providers would not be interesting in running their cables or > even providing service to high crime slum areas that the Baby Bells do > support. Further, the Baby Bells have to have human service reps to > handle customer complaints, ironically some coming from the > possibility that VOIP providers failed to provide proper ANI and > innundated customers with campaign calls (as recently described in > this newsgroup). > There have been some posts here recently complaining about long waits > for service for some VOIP providers. It's one thing to be a novel new > technology serving techo-geeks who can live with glitches. I suspect > the high volume campaign callers didn't care if a percentage of calls > failed to go through. But as the service expands into many people > depending on the phone to make a living, such problems won't be > tolerated. In my humble opinion, VOIP has a long way to go, further > than its proponents recognize. > [TELECOM Digest Editor's Note: So, there are a few shortomings still > to be dealt with on VOIP. No one has ever claimed it was perfect; > far from it. But the trade offs are worth considering. Like the > Walmart versus the downtown store argument we had; some people may > prefer its inexpensive cost and flexibilty over some of the > traditional telecom 'advantages'. PAT] We recently switched over and got Voip and got rid of our land line. So far we are pleased and would really never know the difference in quality. We haven't gotten our first phone bill yet, but I'm sure I'll be much happier with this one as I have my previous bills. One of the best things about voip: the cost. I don't know a whole lot about all the ins and outs of the voice mail and the features on the web site, but it seems to all be working fine. We rely on our phone to call family and friends, and so far we have had no problems doing that, so we're happy. ------------------------------ TELECOM Digest is an electronic journal devoted mostly but not exclusively to telecommunications topics. It is circulated anywhere there is email, in addition to various telecom forums on a variety of networks such as Compuserve and America On Line, Yahoo Groups, and other forums. It is also gatewayed to Usenet where it appears as the moderated newsgroup 'comp.dcom.telecom'. TELECOM Digest is a not-for-profit, mostly non-commercial educational service offered to the Internet by Patrick Townson. All the contents of the Digest are compilation-copyrighted. You may reprint articles in some other media on an occasional basis, but please attribute my work and that of the original author. Contact information: Patrick Townson/TELECOM Digest Post Office Box 50 Independence, KS 67301 Phone: 620-402-0134 Fax 1: 775-255-9970 Fax 2: 530-309-7234 Fax 3: 208-692-5145 Email: editor@telecom-digest.org Subscribe: telecom-subscribe@telecom-digest.org Unsubscribe:telecom-unsubscribe@telecom-digest.org This Digest is the oldest continuing e-journal about telecomm- unications on the Internet, having been founded in August, 1981 and published continuously since then. Our archives are available for your review/research. We believe we are the oldest e-zine/mailing list on the internet in any category! URL information: http://telecom-digest.org Anonymous FTP: mirror.lcs.mit.edu/telecom-archives/archives/ (or use our mirror site: ftp.epix.net/pub/telecom-archives) Email <==> FTP: telecom-archives@telecom-digest.org Send a simple, one line note to that automated address for a help file on how to use the automatic retrieval system for archives files. You can get desired files in email. ************************************************************************* * TELECOM Digest is partially funded by a grant from * * Judith Oppenheimer, President of ICB Inc. and purveyor of accurate * * 800 & Dot Com News, Intelligence, Analysis, and Consulting. * * http://ICBTollFree.com, http://1800TheExpert.com * * Views expressed herein should not be construed as representing * * views of Judith Oppenheimer or ICB Inc. * ************************************************************************* ICB Toll Free News. Contact information is not sold, rented or leased. One click a day feeds a person a meal. Go to http://www.thehungersite.com Copyright 2004 ICB, Inc. and TELECOM Digest. All rights reserved. Our attorney is Bill Levant, of Blue Bell, PA. ************************ DIRECTORY ASSISTANCE JUST 65 CENTS ONE OR TWO INQUIRIES CHARGED TO YOUR CREDIT CARD! REAL TIME, UP TO DATE! SPONSORED BY TELECOM DIGEST AND EASY411.COM SIGN UP AT http://www.easy411.com/telecomdigest ! ************************ --------------------------------------------------------------- Finally, the Digest is funded by gifts from generous readers such as yourself who provide funding in amounts deemed appropriate. Your help is important and appreciated. A suggested donation of fifty dollars per year per reader is considered appropriate. See our address above. Please make at least a single donation to cover the cost of processing your name to the mailing list. All opinions expressed herein are deemed to be those of the author. Any organizations listed are for identification purposes only and messages should not be considered any official expression by the organization. End of TELECOM Digest V23 #577 ****************************** From editor@telecom-digest.org Fri Dec 3 22:37:20 2004 Received: (from ptownson@localhost) by massis.lcs.mit.edu (8.11.6p3/8.11.6) id iB43bJQ25598; Fri, 3 Dec 2004 22:37:20 -0500 (EST) Date: Fri, 3 Dec 2004 22:37:20 -0500 (EST) From: editor@telecom-digest.org Message-Id: <200412040337.iB43bJQ25598@massis.lcs.mit.edu> X-Authentication-Warning: massis.lcs.mit.edu: ptownson set sender to editor@telecom-digest.org using -f To: ptownson Approved: patsnewlist Subject: TELECOM Digest V23 #578 TELECOM Digest Fri, 3 Dec 2004 22:37:00 EST Volume 23 : Issue 578 Inside This Issue: Editor: Patrick A. Townson Kicking the Avaya Habit (Geoffrey Welsh) Salzano's NorVergence Money Found??? (David O. Rodriguez) Bill of Rights Day Dinner 12/15 (alan@bloomfieldpress.com) Dude, Ring Me Up A Game (Eric Friedebach) Samsung Beats Motorola In Market Share (Eric Friedebach) Report: Europe Sees Broadband Boom (Telecom dailyLead from USTA) OnStar Frequency of Use (Monty Solomon) Fax vrs. VOIP (John McHarry) Re: CA DMV Chief Backs Tax by Mile (jmeissen@aracnet.com) Re: CA DMV Chief Backs Tax by Mile (Clarence Dold) Re: Lingo Voip SUCKS! (Tony P.) Re: Dropping SBC For a VoIP Solution - Vonage or Packet8 (Tony P.) Telecom and VOIP (Voice over Internet Protocol) Digest for the Internet. All contents here are copyrighted by Patrick Townson and the individual writers/correspondents. Articles may be used in other journals or newsgroups, provided the writer's name and the Digest are included in the fair use quote. By using -any name or email address- included herein for -any- reason other than responding to an article herein, you agree to pay a hundred dollars to the recipients of the email. =========================== Addresses herein are not to be added to any mailing list, nor to be sold or given away without explicit written consent. Chain letters, viruses, porn, spam, and miscellaneous junk are definitely unwelcome. We must fight spam for the same reason we fight crime: not because we are naive enough to believe that we will ever stamp it out, but because we do not want the kind of world that results when no one stands against crime. Geoffrey Welsh =========================== See the bottom of this issue for subscription and archive details and the name of our lawyer; other stuff of interest. ---------------------------------------------------------------------- From: Geoffrey Welsh Subject: Kicking the Avaya Habit Date: Fri, 3 Dec 2004 17:45:12 -0500 Hello, my name is Geoff and I'm an Avayaholic. You might think that ending a business relationship with the mob or kicking a drug habit is hard ... until you try cancelling a contract with Avaya. You may think that I'm exagerrating, and that I'm being insensitive to people who have substance abuse problems or compulsive habits, but I'm telling you that dealing with Avaya, while not nearly as devastating as those problems, is just as hard to stop. My company closed an office in Georgia earlier this year, and one of the pieces of equipment salvaged was a Partner key system. Since we were planning to relocate an office in Virginia, I had the system shipped there for installation in the new office. Avaya, though, has changed our plans. My office facilities manager tells me that a letter was sent to Avaya in June requesting cancellation of our maintenance contracts which expired/renewed in September, but the invoices still kept coming. My boss gave me the name of an Avaya person (we'll call this person "A") to contact about the continuing invoices so I left a voice mail for her and sent her an e-mail. She replied to the e-mail saying that she did not recall working on our account, so I gave her the names of the people she might have talked to and asked her whether I should be talking to her or to someone else. When I had not heard back from her in almost two weeks, I sent another e-mail asking if she was the person I should be talking to; she replied and said that she "really would like to assist" me but needed our account numbers. I sent them. I did not hear back. Three weeks later we had received another round of invoices issued since I provided "A" with the account numbers so I called the inquiry number (which, before letting you talk to a human being about canceling, forces you to listen to a minute or two on why canceling is A Bad Thing and you really shouldn't do it) and asked another Avaya person (we'll call this person "B") why the accounts had not been cancelled. I was told politely but firmly that the only way we could cancel was in writing, on company letterhead, stating our account numbers (we have two, but that's another story), contract numbers, and "group code". She informed me that, since we had paid our invoices after some of the contracts had automatically renewed, that we had technically accepted the renewal. At this point I wasn't going to argue about renewals or costs, I just wanted the contracts canceled so I could move on to other things. I wrote up the FAX, included the account numbers, contract numbers, group code, and a request for acknowledgement and sent it off to the phone number she provided. Five weeks later I have yet another pair of new invoices from Avaya that completely fail to mention cancellation and threaten to automatically renew next week the one remaining contract which has not yet renewed automatically. I call, again listening to the stern counsel against cancelling, and ask whether they have received our cancellation letter. I'm informed that they have a letter dated June that was sent to the wrong address, but not the one I sent via FAX in October ... and the accounts are not yet cancelled. The person I spoke to today turns out to be person "A", who offered to help back in September, but ignored every other e-mail I sent. She did, however, offer to connect me with "B", who might have my letter in her personal file. "B" didn't answer, so I left a voice mail. She replied in e-mail that she did not receive my FAX and could I send it again to her attention right away because she was going to be away for some time starting Monday. I did so. I called back and left a voice mail asking for confirmation, but have yet to hear back. I don't need to be a gambler to wager that this FAX won't result in the contracts being canceled, either. There is nothing that I can name in polite company that smells worse than this Avaya situation: (1) They have a letter requesting cancellation dated June. They say it was sent to the wrong address, but apparently they have it now because it is in our file ... but the contract has not been cancelled. (2) "A" dropped the ball not once but twice. (3) If Avaya has strict rules about how a customer must request cancellation, "A" sort of lied by promising to help but not mentioning this simple but critical fact. If there are no such rules, then "B" lied blatantly. (4) Maybe "B" didn't get my FAX. Maybe it would be unreasonable for me to expect her to let me know that she didn't receive what I told her I'd be sending promptly. Maybe she hoped the stern lessons recited by the voice mail system had sunk in and we had changed our minds. Nonetheless, the FAX was sent to the correct Avaya number and somebody must have picked it up. In addition to the standard letterhead stuff, it stated our account numbers, contract numbers, "group code", the address where the system was [formerly] installed, the name our company goes by in the U.S., the name it used to go by internationally, the name it currently goes by internationally (all basically the same, except for the words like Ltd., Inc., Corporation, etc.), the addresses that might have been associated with our accounts and invoices over the years, and my e-mail address. Whoever picked it up did not act on it, did not put it in our file, did not forward it to the person apparently responsible for our accounts, and did not me about it. (5) "B" is in no hurry to let me know whether she got the FAX when I resent it. No one likes to be cancelled. Lots of contracts have automatic passive renewal clauses, and I've known lots of companies with internal communication and organization problems, but could these all be accidental incidents coincidentally preventing us from canceling, or am I right to suspect that Avaya is intentionally and systematically interfering with legitimate attempts to cancel contracts, perhaps because they feel they have nothing to lose and continuing payments to gain? In our case they lost an opportunity to sell a maintenance contract for the very same system in a different location, and a lasting impression on me that will make me try to avoid dealing with Avaya ever again. I share my story in the hopes that someone will learn from our mistake and not get hooked the way we did. Geoffrey Welsh LEGAL NOTICE: The content of this message is solely the responsibility of the author and does not necessarily reflect the opinions of his employer, associates, dependents, cellmates, or dominatrixes (dominatrices?) [TELECOM Digest Editor's Note: At some point you are going to have to just dump the matter and let them do as they wish, then form an approprate action to that. Always get a postal green card for any mail you send them and keep a copy of it. Eventually you begin responding to their collection requests by forwarding them a copy of your green proof of delivery card from the post office and a xerox copy of your last letter, then wash your hands of it. You cannot expect to save the entire company from its foolishness and lack of attention to customer requests, so quit trying. PAT] ------------------------------ From: David O. Rodriguez Date: Fri, 03 Dec 2004 14:31:31 -0500 Subject: Salzano's NorVergence Money Found ??? Pat, I received the e-mail below and it seems to be regarding Salzano's NorVerge money. I do not know if this is accurate information, wrong information, or, someone's attempt at a bad joke. However, it got my attention. David To: norvergence@yahoogroups.com From: Send an Instant Message "sharp_ja" Date: Fri, 03 Dec 2004 19:07:20 -0000 Subject: [norvergence] Re: Anything new on the Bankruptcy? I have heard that they have found the trust fund though. It's not in the Cayman's like everyone thinks. It is an island though. Cooks Island (off of the Fiji's). There are some very powerful people going after it to lock it up. Let's cross our fingers all. ------------------------------ Date: Fri, 3 Dec 2004 12:43:40 -0500 From: alan@bloomfieldpress.com Subject: Bill of Rights Day Dinner 12/15 Bill of Rights Day Celebrations People across the country are celebrating Bill of Rights Day this December 15 -- the date the Bill of Rights was ratified in 1791. Why not celebrate it too! If you are in the Phoenix-metro area, come join the dinner meeting that evening, when the Bill of Rights will be read out loud from a parchment copy. Other activities are planned. Should be a lot of fun, time to contemplate our rights, break bread with friends, new and old. Bring your own copy of the Bill to follow along. If you're not in our neck of the woods, why not organize a lunch or dinner of your own? Spend a few hours cherishing the fundamental charter of our liberties. It's easy, just pick a place, and tell everyone. Did I say it's easy, or what? If you need some help or ideas, go to JPFO's website and click on Bill of Rights Day. jpfo.org. Let them know what you're up to and they'll give you some free publicity too. IN PHOENIX: Bill of Rights Day Dinner Dec. 15, 2004, 6 p.m. Hometown Buffet Restaurant All You Can Eat, under $10. 1312 N. Scottsdale Rd. W. side of road, S. of McDowell RSVP PLEASE: dial911book@hotmail.com Sincerely, Alan Korwin, Author Gun Laws of America ------------------------------ From: friedebach@yahoo.com (Eric Friedebach) Subject: Dude, Ring Me Up A Game Date: 3 Dec 2004 10:08:26 -0800 Organization: http://groups.google.com David M. Ewalt, 12.02.04, Forbes.com NEW YORK - Forget the PlayStation Portable and ditch that GameBoy. Kids might be pining for those hot portable gaming systems now, but the real future of mobile gaming could already be in their pocket. Today's kids are mobile experts, utterly comfortable with tiny screens and capable of typing with their thumbs faster than many adults can on a keyboard. They're also huge consumers of wireless phone service, the fastest growing group of cellular users and the heaviest users of minutes and data. Pair those characteristics with today's handsets -- big, bright color screens, on-board memory and high-speed data connections -- and you've got a recipe for gaming nirvana. Mobile gaming is taking off, and thanks in part to the influence of kids, promises to be a boon to wireless vendors. http://www.forbes.com/2004/12/02/cx_de_1202kidphone.html Eric Friedebach /KMPX Rocks!/ ------------------------------ From: friedebach@yahoo.com (Eric Friedebach) Subject: Samsung Beats Motorola In Market Share Date: 3 Dec 2004 10:26:00 -0800 Organization: http://groups.google.com Mark Tatge, 12.01.04, Forbes.com CHICAGO - Catching Nokia has been an obsession at Motorola. But is the Schaumburg, Ill.-based handset maker catching the Asian flu? The Asian invasion of low-cost, moderately priced handsets could be Motorola Chief Executive Edward Zander's biggest headache. Gartner released third-quarter figures Wednesday showing that Samsung had surpassed Motorola in global market share, snaring the No. 2 sales spot for the first time ever. Motorola's share slipped to 13.4% compared with the 13.8% share posted by Samsung. "This is a blow to Motorola," said Gartner analyst Ben Wood. Samsung's third-quarter lead over Motorola was only 588,000 units. Wood added that Motorola will likely regain the No. 2 spot during the fourth quarter after sales from the all-important Christmas selling season are counted. http://www.forbes.com/technology/2004/12/01/cz_mt_1201mot.html Eric Friedebach /KMPX Rocks!/ ------------------------------ Date: Fri, 3 Dec 2004 13:31:56 EST From: Telecom dailyLead from USTA Subject: Report: Europe sees broadband boom Telecom dailyLead from USTA December 3, 2004 http://www.dailylead.com/latestIssue.jsp?i=17891&l=2017006 TODAY'S HEADLINES NEWS OF THE DAY * Report: Europe sees broadband boom BUSINESS & INDUSTRY WATCH * Two top Nokia executives to resign * BT to use VoIP at call centers * Broadband providers offer free merchandise * Juniper unveils TX router to rival Cisco's CRS-1 USTA SPOTLIGHT * Fill Your Most Urgent Job Requirements!! EMERGING TECHNOLOGIES * New Wi-Fi standard set to emerge REGULATORY & LEGISLATIVE * Napster founder launches new online music service Follow the link below to read quick summaries of these stories and others. http://www.dailylead.com/latestIssue.jsp?i=17891&l=2017006 Legal and Privacy information at http://www.dailylead.com/about/privacy_legal.jsp SmartBrief, Inc. 1100 H ST NW, Suite 1000 Washington, DC 20005 ------------------------------ Date: Fri, 3 Dec 2004 22:17:01 -0500 From: Monty Solomon Subject: OnStar Frequency of Use OnStar Achieves Another First as Winner of Good Housekeeping's 'Good Buy' Award for Best Service NEW YORK, Dec. 3 /PRNewswire/ -- OnStar by General Motors was awarded the "Good Buy" Award from the Good Housekeeping Institute (GHI) today. OnStar is the first service ever acknowledged in GHI's new "best service" category. This is the first time any automotive product or service has been become an award winner since the "Good Buy" award program began ten years ago. Each month on average, OnStar receives about 700 airbag notifications and 11,000 emergency assistance calls, which include 4,000 Good Samaritan calls for a variety of emergency situations. In addition, each month OnStar advisors respond to an average of 500 stolen vehicle location requests, 20,000 requests for roadside assistance, 36,000 remote door-unlock requests and 19,000 GM Goodwrench remote diagnostics requests. - http://finance.lycos.com/home/news/story.asp?story=45410120 ------------------------------ From: John McHarry Subject: FAX vs VOIP Lines: 10 Date: Sat, 04 Dec 2004 00:58:56 GMT Organization: EarthLink Inc. -- http://www.EarthLink.net This is really a reply to a question posted on a discussion of Lingo, but the subject is really quite different from that of the original thread. I believe the issue with FAX over VOIP is that VOIP uses lossy compression that does not treat FAX modulation gently. This tends to be a problem over any compressed link. The workaround is to recognize the intitial sniffing of a fax machine, demodulate the fax tones, send the raw data, and remodulate at the far end. Since Group 3 FAX is pretty standard, I don't see why only certain machines would be compatible, but no vendor can test all of them, so I can see their listing ones that are known compatible. ------------------------------ From: jmeissen@aracnet.com Subject: Re: CA DMV Chief Backs Tax by Mile Date: 3 Dec 2004 18:22:02 GMT Organization: http://extra.newsguy.com In article , Lisa Hancock wrote: > How would such devices handle out of state driving? That's the point of the GPS device. Otherwise you could use a simple digital odometer type device to measure the distance traveled. > This isn't a problem just in California but in all states. We > like to drive and that costs money, an awful lot of it. Unfortunately, they're considering the same thing up here in Oregon, too. I'm amazed that such things even get consideration, but governments have a history of implementing things that would conceivably be too expensive, complex or intrusive. Especially under the current administration. The loss of revenue might be less of an issue if gasoline taxes were actually used strictly for transportation. John Meissen jmeissen@aracnet.com John Meissen john@meissen.org Think Logically / Act Intelligently / Question Authority ------------------------------ From: dold@XReXXCAXDM.usenet.us.com Subject: Re: CA DMV Chief Backs Tax by Mile Date: Fri, 3 Dec 2004 21:12:04 +0000 (UTC) Organization: a2i network Lisa Hancock wrote: > Sounds like it would be much easier to simply raise the gas tax. I > can't help but wonder if they're even serious about this or if this is > a joke. The premise is that increased fuel efficiency has resulted in a loss of gasonline tax revenue, while the number of miles driven has increased. If the gasonline tax had been a percentage of the sales price, instead of a fixed amount, the revenue would have gone up, and no one would have noticed. The federal tax hasn't increased since 1997, and actually was reduced in 2004 back to the 1993 level for 80% of the gas in California. The state tax hasn't increased since 1994. Raising the existing tax has no underlying implementation cost, just a political one. Road maintenance has been underfunded in California since Governor Jerry Brown decided that the revenue was best spent elsewhere. Clarence A Dold - Hidden Valley (Lake County) CA USA 38.8-122.5 ------------------------------ From: Tony P. Subject: Re: Lingo Voip SUCKS! Organization: ATCC Date: Fri, 3 Dec 2004 17:41:49 -0500 In article , RickMerrill@comTHROWcast.net says: > Garth Nospam wrote: >> LINGO SUCKS! >> I had two lines that I needed ported over to their service ... They >> strung me along for over the 30 day trial saying that they were >> working on it. Then they say Verizon is blocking access to the >> lines. > "Blocking" was the wrong word. If you look a matrix of all phone > companies' numbers that are converted to another phone companies' system > there is a complex number of dates at which the conversion (i.e. number > portability) will begin. >> I call Verizon they say that they would be happy to transfer >> my numbers and there is no blocking going on. I call Lingo back and >> they say they can't transfer my numbers due to technical limitations >> on their end! Then they charge me a $40 cancellation FEE!! >> Bastards! And they have no managers to talk with or even a mailing >> address! What crap. > Keep at 'em until they cough up a refund or a credit or ! a phone. >> Also beware if you want to hook up a fax machine to their Voip box it >> has to be one that they support. > That's a good caution: Does anyone know more about FAX vs. VOIP? >> Evil bastards Lingo needs to shape >> up get better customer service and maybe they will be worth it! > Keep hoping! I'm 25 days out from my switch to Vonage and my number still hasn't been ported. I've been talking to the PUC, Verizon, Vonage etc. What I've gotten from this is a clear picture of the anti-competitive nature of Verizon and the structure of Vonage's network. It seems that Verizon only has to do rapid LNP with other FCC regulated carriers. If you're not FCC regulated they can take as long as they want and delay for whatever reason they wish because they're free of regulatory burden. With that in mind I plan to file suit against Verizon for the additional two months of their service I had to purchase either due to their incompetence or their outright anti competitive behavior. If anyone else has had this trouble with Verizon I invite you to contact me. The more the merrier I say, and the more likely the FCC and DOJ might take notice. Vonage basically buys excess capacity on two carriers switches, Paetec or Focal Communications. Interestingly neither lists their switch type on the telcodata web site so I'm left to surmise that in my case, Paetec is just buying UNE from Verizon. That being the case my number transfer shouldn't take more than a couple days. But Verizon won't treat it as carrier to carrier as they should. A few years from now when the Verizon's and SBC's and Qwests are marginalized they'll be wondering why they only carry < 25% of the market. Years of reliance on tariff and regulation are the reason. [TELECOM Digest Editor's Note: The same thing happened to me when I decided to switch from Southwestern Bell (SBC) to Prairie Stream. First, SBC told Prairie Stream 'he is not eligible for conversion, since he has DSL on his line.' That, to them, was a satisfactory and complete answer. When Prairie Stream told me that, I called back to SBC and cancelled my DSL, concurrent with getting cable internet turned on the same day. Then I told Prairie Stream try it again. That time SBC said I would have to call them personally to have them turn it off. Prairie Stream told me that, so I called back to SBC once again and told them allow the switch. SBC's answer to me that time was 'well, okay, we will turn over your line, but we are really backed up here with work orders, etc so it may be two or three weeks before we are able to get around to it. I told them that was fine with me, but to mark my file that I requested a total disonnecton as of that date, and to make sure it was reflected on the bill. Prairie Stream took possession of my line a couple days later, but only because the technician at Prairie Stream put in another order for it and simply took it over. None of the former Bell telcos give up easily; UNE-C was bad enough for them, but VOIP is really doing a number on them. At least I was lucky that it only took about a week to get it done here, since Prairie Stream is a local company and I can walk over to their office from here in a few minutes and deal directly with the owner, and he continually pushed on SBC for me. I can see where someone some distance away from the carrier they want to use (and with no personal contacts at that company to push for them) could easily spend a month fighting with Bell over it. Begin by taking all their excuses away from them, such as DSL, etc. PAT] ------------------------------ From: Tony P. Subject: Re: Dropping SBC For a VoIP Solution -- Vonage or Packet8 ?? Organization: ATCC Date: Fri, 3 Dec 2004 17:43:43 -0500 In article , rlangly@gmail.com says: > rlangly@gmail.com (Ringo Langly) wrote in message > news:: >> trb_1217@yahoo.com (tgreen) wrote in message >> news:: >>> Ringo, >>> I am looking forward to your review. I recently went through a similar >>> VOIP company comparison and I settled on Sunrocket. They are a new >>> company, but so far I have had a good experience. I tried them out >>> because it seemed pretty risk free -- no sign up, activation, or >>> cancellation charges. I hope you have a good experience. I think >>> VOIP is going to get pretty big over the next year. >> Hi everyone, >> Well last night the Packet8 router (or whatever it is) arrived, and in >> about 10 minutes it was activated and I had a dialtone. The first >> thing I did was run a speedtest on DSLReports.com, and I was sitting >> at around 2.4Mbps down and 350Kbps up (nothing else on network >> active), which is about normal for me. >> I made my first call to my landline (SBC), and the first thing I >> noticed was the delay. It was generally less then 1/2 a second, but >> it's enough where two people will step on one another while talking. >> I called the Packet8 tech support, and they said there generally is >> some delay, but it's should be no more then 50-100ms, which is hardly >> noticeable. Mine was more like 1/4-1/2 second delay. This doesn't >> sound like a biggie, but it breaks-up the casual flow of conversation. >> I then started firing-off some of my other applications, like iTunes >> (stream is 128K), Azureus (limited to 5K upload and 1500K download), >> email, and all my other web-based apps I usually run. With all this >> running I did another speed test, and I was down to about 1.1 Mbps >> down and 300Kbps up, which is still well within the 20Kbps or so >> required by Packet8. >> The sound quality is excellent, and caller ID, voicemail, and >> everything thus far works great. I even updated the firmware in the >> router, but the delay is still there. If anything is the killer it'll >> be the delay -- but I'll give it a full try for the next few weeks. >> I didn't sign any contract or anything, but it's free for the first >> month if I don't like it and send it back -- given I don't go over 300 >> minutes. The reasons I want to drop SBC is mainly because I'm paying >> $37/month and most VoIP services are closer to $20-$25/month. Plus my >> SBC line likes to quit working when it rains, and though I've told SBC >> exactly where the problem is they still haven't fixed it. >> Bottom line, the delay is annoying, but outside of that the service >> works great. I'll post another review later after I use it for a week >> or so. >> Ringo > Hi all, > I have tried another feature offered by Packet8 that is rather bad ... > They have the option to forward calls to another number if you're not > at home, and in testing I forwarded calls to my work phone. From > another phone in my office I called home and in about 3 rings my > office line rang. > Well, once I picked it up the delay was literally 2-3 seconds. I'm > thinking the call goes from ma bell to Packet8 to the VoIP router at > home then back to Packet8 then back to ma bell -- which creates a > MAJOR delay. It's literally not worth using with such a delay. > Once again other then the delays the service is great. And I know > it's not my broadband because again during the test I had 300Kbps up > and 1.5Mbps down according to DSL Reports. Heh -- I called my Vonage number from my Verizon phone - there's about a half second or so delay. So really no worse than if I'd used two Vonage or two Verizon lines. ------------------------------ TELECOM Digest is an electronic journal devoted mostly but not exclusively to telecommunications topics. It is circulated anywhere there is email, in addition to various telecom forums on a variety of networks such as Compuserve and America On Line, Yahoo Groups, and other forums. It is also gatewayed to Usenet where it appears as the moderated newsgroup 'comp.dcom.telecom'. TELECOM Digest is a not-for-profit, mostly non-commercial educational service offered to the Internet by Patrick Townson. All the contents of the Digest are compilation-copyrighted. You may reprint articles in some other media on an occasional basis, but please attribute my work and that of the original author. Contact information: Patrick Townson/TELECOM Digest Post Office Box 50 Independence, KS 67301 Phone: 620-402-0134 Fax 1: 775-255-9970 Fax 2: 530-309-7234 Fax 3: 208-692-5145 Email: editor@telecom-digest.org Subscribe: telecom-subscribe@telecom-digest.org Unsubscribe:telecom-unsubscribe@telecom-digest.org This Digest is the oldest continuing e-journal about telecomm- unications on the Internet, having been founded in August, 1981 and published continuously since then. Our archives are available for your review/research. We believe we are the oldest e-zine/mailing list on the internet in any category! URL information: http://telecom-digest.org Anonymous FTP: mirror.lcs.mit.edu/telecom-archives/archives/ (or use our mirror site: ftp.epix.net/pub/telecom-archives) Email <==> FTP: telecom-archives@telecom-digest.org Send a simple, one line note to that automated address for a help file on how to use the automatic retrieval system for archives files. You can get desired files in email. ************************************************************************* * TELECOM Digest is partially funded by a grant from * * Judith Oppenheimer, President of ICB Inc. and purveyor of accurate * * 800 & Dot Com News, Intelligence, Analysis, and Consulting. * * http://ICBTollFree.com, http://1800TheExpert.com * * Views expressed herein should not be construed as representing * * views of Judith Oppenheimer or ICB Inc. * ************************************************************************* ICB Toll Free News. Contact information is not sold, rented or leased. One click a day feeds a person a meal. Go to http://www.thehungersite.com Copyright 2004 ICB, Inc. and TELECOM Digest. All rights reserved. Our attorney is Bill Levant, of Blue Bell, PA. ************************ DIRECTORY ASSISTANCE JUST 65 CENTS ONE OR TWO INQUIRIES CHARGED TO YOUR CREDIT CARD! REAL TIME, UP TO DATE! SPONSORED BY TELECOM DIGEST AND EASY411.COM SIGN UP AT http://www.easy411.com/telecomdigest ! ************************ --------------------------------------------------------------- Finally, the Digest is funded by gifts from generous readers such as yourself who provide funding in amounts deemed appropriate. Your help is important and appreciated. A suggested donation of fifty dollars per year per reader is considered appropriate. See our address above. Please make at least a single donation to cover the cost of processing your name to the mailing list. All opinions expressed herein are deemed to be those of the author. Any organizations listed are for identification purposes only and messages should not be considered any official expression by the organization. End of TELECOM Digest V23 #578 ****************************** From editor@telecom-digest.org Sat Dec 4 22:28:40 2004 Received: (from ptownson@localhost) by massis.lcs.mit.edu (8.11.6p3/8.11.6) id iB53Ser06805; Sat, 4 Dec 2004 22:28:40 -0500 (EST) Date: Sat, 4 Dec 2004 22:28:40 -0500 (EST) From: editor@telecom-digest.org Message-Id: <200412050328.iB53Ser06805@massis.lcs.mit.edu> X-Authentication-Warning: massis.lcs.mit.edu: ptownson set sender to editor@telecom-digest.org using -f To: ptownson Approved: patsnewlist Subject: TELECOM Digest V23 #579 TELECOM Digest Sat, 4 Dec 2004 22:28:00 EST Volume 23 : Issue 579 Inside This Issue: Editor: Patrick A. Townson Re: Lingo Voip SUCKS! (Lisa Hancock) Re: Lingo Voip SUCKS! (Fred Goldstein) Re: Using a Fax Machine On a Shared Line With Voicemail (Ken) Re: GM Auto's OnStar Phone System? (Jim Burks) Re: Bill of Rights Day Dinner 12/15 (Rick Merrill) Re: Bill of Rights Day Dinner 12/15 (Joseph) Whose Ad Is This? Advertisers Play with Web Films (Lisa Minter) Bush Signs Internet Access Tax Ban Into Law (Lisa Minter) Supreme Court to Decide Cable Internet Case (Lisa Minter) U.S. Court Says Interior Dept. Can Stay Online (Lisa Minter) VOIP Development Software/SDK - New Updates; Pricing (LanScape Staff) Re: Kicking the Avaya Habit (Tom Betz) Re: Spam Gets Religion (Tom Betz) Re: Fax vrs. VOIP (Lisa Hancock) Telecom and VOIP (Voice over Internet Protocol) Digest for the Internet. All contents here are copyrighted by Patrick Townson and the individual writers/correspondents. Articles may be used in other journals or newsgroups, provided the writer's name and the Digest are included in the fair use quote. By using -any name or email address- included herein for -any- reason other than responding to an article herein, you agree to pay a hundred dollars to the recipients of the email. =========================== Addresses herein are not to be added to any mailing list, nor to be sold or given away without explicit written consent. Chain letters, viruses, porn, spam, and miscellaneous junk are definitely unwelcome. We must fight spam for the same reason we fight crime: not because we are naive enough to believe that we will ever stamp it out, but because we do not want the kind of world that results when no one stands against crime. Geoffrey Welsh =========================== See the bottom of this issue for subscription and archive details and the name of our lawyer; other stuff of interest. ---------------------------------------------------------------------- From: hancock4@bbs.cpcn.com (Lisa Hancock) Subject: Re: Lingo Voip SUCKS! Date: 4 Dec 2004 11:04:31 -0800 Organization: http://groups.google.com Tony P. wrote > I'm 25 days out from my switch to Vonage and my number still hasn't > been ported. > I've been talking to the PUC, Verizon, Vonage etc. What I've gotten > from this is a clear picture of the anti-competitive nature of Verizon > and the structure of Vonage's network. FWIW, a friend of mine switched from Verizon to a competitive carrier several times (back and forth while he made up his mind) and never had any trouble. > It seems that Verizon only has to do rapid LNP with other FCC regulated > carriers. If you're not FCC regulated they can take as long as they want > and delay for whatever reason they wish because they're free of > regulatory burden. If Verizon is not under any legal obligation to make the switch in a timely manner, then it is not their fault and you have no basis to sue them. Suppose the VOIP carrier fails to meet technical standards. Will a subscriber blame Verizon instead of the VOIP carrier? That makes for extra unnecessary and unprofitable work for Verizon which other subscribers have to make up the cost. I'm sorry I'm not sympathetic, but it's a double standard. The FCC declared the VOIP carriers to be free of regulation. That means they're on their own while other carriers have to put up with the expense of regulation. Maybe you could avoid Verizon altogether and use broadband cable instead, as some people are doing. Indeed, it was not that hard for our cable company to lay a replacement broadband fiber optic cable through our area; and now -- in competition to Verizon DSL -- they offer high speed Internet. As such, perhaps another carrier could do likewise and eliminate that "final mile" contention. [Just to set the record, I am not connected with Verizon other than being a subscriber. Indeed, I was unhappy with other LD carriers and switched to Verizon for all services.] ------------------------------ Date: Sat, 04 Dec 2004 15:47:39 -0500 From: Fred R. Goldstein Subject: Re: Lingo Voip SUCKS! Can you please change my address to something munged such as fgoldstein@donotspamplease.com or some such? Thanks! In V23 I578 Tony P. wrote: > It seems that Verizon only has to do rapid LNP with other FCC regulated > carriers. If you're not FCC regulated they can take as long as they want > and delay for whatever reason they wish because they're free of > regulatory burden. Of course. Number portability only applies to telephone companies, either wireline or wireless. You can port your number among phone companies, but not to, say, a supermarket company. Lingo and Vonage have gone to great lengths to declare that while they advertise as phone companies, they do not belong to any legal category of local telephone company. Their choice, actually, though it would be hard to get certificated in all states and deal with every state's different rules. > Vonage basically buys excess capacity on two carriers switches, Paetec > or Focal Communications. Interestingly neither lists their switch type > on the telcodata web site so I'm left to surmise that in my case, > Paetec is just buying UNE from Verizon. That being the case my number > transfer shouldn't take more than a couple days. But Verizon won't > treat it as carrier to carrier as they should. You didn't look at the right database. Paetec has a 5ESS-2000 switch. I think they serve RI out of a switch in Hartford, Connecticut, though they also have one in Massachusetts. You can't lease UNE switching capacity for bulk purposes like this. Vonage or Lingo could, theoretically, simply purchase retail PRI service from Verizon, but it would not be a good business relationship, to be sure, and they would not get as good a price as they get from the various other carriers they use around the country (Focal and Paetec being only two). The point, though, is that technically, the number has to be ported to a Paetec or Focal switch. Vonage is an "intermediary", a bulk consumer of telephone numbers who is neither a carrier nor end user. There's no particular reason why Verizon shouldn't be able to quickly (in the usual time frame, not a month) port a number to either carrier. But it's quite possible that Vonage's processes don't quite mesh correctly with their underlying carrier's, and something got stuck. > A few years from now when the Verizon's and SBC's and Qwests are > marginalized they'll be wondering why they only carry < 25% of the > market. > Years of reliance on tariff and regulation are the reason. Part of it. But also note that Verizon and the other Bells have bought into particular standardized Processes for ordering. These are computerized (OSS -- operational support systems), and designed to facilitate "flow-through" -- place the order and no further human intervention is needed, unless wiring is required. But flow-through processes tend to be brittle. If something's not quite standard, it's hard to make it work. A key system is called LSR (local service request). Competitive carriers are allowed to use this. They're also allowed to "bind" their own software to it. When it works, it's great. But it's far from intuitive, has a zillion obscure codes, and it's hard enough for a human to operate. Binding a competitor's system to it is even harder, since computers don't have the intelligence to figure out every possible obscure combination of actions. I know getting my ILEC phone book listing (non-standard, two numbers on one line, each with a different name) straight has been a nightmare, five years and running with three different owners of the cable/CLEC. The systems just didn't bind right. Finally this year I went to the supervisor and asked about going around their own OSS right into the Verizon LSR screen that feeds the phone book. They have somebody who knows how to work it directly. Maybe they'll get it right this time. Vonage and Lingo are newer operations. It doesn't surprise me that some of these things don't work right yet. [Pat added:] > None of the former Bell telcos give up easily; UNE-C was bad enough > for them, but VOIP is really doing a number on them. I don't think that VoIP really scares them. They won't sell you DSL to run it on until you pay for a "first" phone line anyway -- or maybe a "naked" DSL surcharge. So what's the risk of a second line? The cable companies can sell telephony anyway; they're setting up their own dial tone, and their costs are low. The quality of "parasitic" VoIP like Lingo or Vonage won't be as high as real telephone lines or PacketCable (which has reserved bandwidth). And in any case, the Bells are weaning themselves of LD access revenues anyway. It's only the rural telcos, who get high fees from the LD carriers, who are worried. Some of the rural telcos have their own little group, ARIC, which has sent the FCC a proposal for intercarrier compensation in the VoIP era. It basically says that you will pay high toll fees to call up your ISP (Ye Olde Modem Tax, yet another plea), and will pay them measured usage fees for bytes on your DSL too. All to create subsidies to allow inefficient rural telephone companies in high-cost areas to provide local telephone service for half of what we pay in the city, with their own subscribers only paying a small fraction of the cost. I don't see their proposal going anywhere, but it's those companies who are worried about VoIP, not SBC and Verizon (who have their own products, after all), who are a little sick of subsidizing the rurals themselves. ------------------------------ From: Ken@PrivacyCorps.com (Ken) Subject: Re: Using a Fax Machine on a Shared Line With Voicemail Date: 4 Dec 2004 09:21:08 -0800 Organization: http://groups.google.com michaelm2030@yahoo.com (Michael Monteiro) wrote in message news:<5a0f4a94.0411270704.7ae93fc9@posting.google.com>: > Problem: I have a fax machine connected to a single, shared voice > line. As it stands, I cannot receive faxes unless I disable my > voicemail. I understand that answering machines can be used with fax > machines on a single line because the fax listens when a call is > answered by an answering machine and then takes over if the call is a > fax transmission. However, this does not work with voicemail. My > provider does not support distinctive ring. Do I have any other > options aside from disabling my voicemail or getting a second line for > my fax? I could get an answering machine, but I'd rather not go that > route. I'd rather keep my voicemail. > btw, my provider is Vonage - VoIP. SIMPLE SOLUTION: Since you receive Caller ID information (www.privacycorps.com/pages/caller-id-information.htm)from your service provider, you can install our FAXFIREWALL (www.privacycorps.com/products/?id=23) which will serve a number of purposes. First and foremost, it will prevent you from receiving junk faxes (www.privacycorps.com/pages/junk-fax-faq.htm) and, by using a Remote (www.privacycorps.com/products/?id=22) you can segregate your voice from fax calls by directing your welcome fax broadcasters (and not junk fax broadcasters) directly to your fax device, without ringing your voice phone. With these devices connected, you should set your fax device, whether it be a fax machine or fax modem, to the lowest number of rings to answer. Secondarily, you will be able to block ALL unwanted calls from ringing your phone by either blocking those you don't want, or by building a list of 'Invited' callers. You will be able to do all of this without any additional services or monthly charges from your telephone service provider, and without having to pay for a dedicated phone line or distinctive ring service, just to receive faxes. The big bonus here, is that you will no longer be bothered by telemarketers, misdialed numbers, pollsters, and other annoying calls while you accomplish your goals and save money every month. If you have any questions or need further information, please visit us at www.PrivacyCorps.com/block-calls or call our customer service department 9AM-5PM PST, M-F. ------------------------------ From: Jim Burks Subject: Re: GM Auto's OnStar Phone System? Date: Sat, 04 Dec 2004 14:20:28 GMT Organization: Road Runner High Speed Online http://www.rr.com Al Dykes wrote in message news:telecom23.577.6@telecom-digest.org: > Whenever I hear an advert for a GM car that features the built-in > phone system I wonder what kind of cell service they use. Someone > here proably knows. > ISTM that it's got to be analog, for the widest possible coverage, but > I thought this was being phased sooner rather than later. OnStar uses Verizon Wireless for connectivity. Original version was analog only. Current product uses analog/CDMA. ------------------------------ From: Rick Merrill Subject: Re: Bill of Rights Day Dinner 12/15 Organization: Comcast Online Date: Sat, 04 Dec 2004 16:21:39 GMT alan@bloomfieldpress.com wrote: > Bill of Rights Day Celebrations > People across the country are celebrating Bill of Rights Day this > December 15 -- the date the Bill of Rights was ratified in 1791. Why > not celebrate it too! > If you are in the Phoenix-metro area, come join the dinner meeting > that evening, when the Bill of Rights will be read out loud from a > parchment copy. Other activities are planned. Should be a lot of fun, > time to contemplate our rights, break bread with friends, new and > old. Bring your own copy of the Bill to follow along. > If you're not in our neck of the woods, why not organize a lunch or > dinner of your own? > Spend a few hours cherishing the fundamental charter of our > liberties. It's easy, just pick a place, and tell everyone. Did I > say it's easy, or what? If you need some help or ideas, go to > JPFO's website and click on Bill of Rights Day. jpfo.org. Let them > know what you're up to and they'll give you some free publicity > too. > IN PHOENIX: > Bill of Rights Day Dinner > Dec. 15, 2004, 6 p.m. > Hometown Buffet Restaurant > All You Can Eat, under $10. > 1312 N. Scottsdale Rd. > W. side of road, S. of McDowell That's all very well, but what STATE are you in???? [TELEOCM Digest Editor's Note: He said earlier in his message he was in Phoenix, and I guess that means Arizona. *You* start your own event and publicize it on that web site. PAT] ------------------------------ From: Joseph Subject: Re: Bill of Rights Day Dinner 12/15 Date: Sat, 04 Dec 2004 08:40:54 -0800 Reply-To: JoeOfSeattle@yahoo.com On Fri, 3 Dec 2004 12:43:40 -0500, alan@bloomfieldpress.com wrote: > People across the country are celebrating Bill of Rights Day this > December 15 -- the date the Bill of Rights was ratified in 1791. Why > not celebrate it too! Are we celebrating its demise as well? That seems to be the direction we're going with the present administration in the White House. ------------------------------ From: Lisa Minter Subject: Whose Ad Is This? Advertisers Play with Web Films Date: Sat, 4 Dec 2004 11:41:04 EST NEW YORK (Reuters) - When the manager of a coin-operated laundry seduces a mother and daughter and convinces them to skip town, there's bound to be trouble, or perhaps a movie plot. In this case, the story is part of an intricate set of short Internet films improbably designed to attract viewers to a new model of Mercury cars (http://www.meettheluckyones.com). Advertisers are devoting larger budgets to these Web hybrids of entertainment and marketing, hoping to convince consumers they offer not just a product, but also the elusive element of cool. The financial payoff of Internet films, sometimes called Webisodes, may be just as hard to pin down, even as marketers recruit top celebrities and moviemaking talent for the job. "These have really been about brand experiences and are not necessarily campaigns that would do well by direct marketing standards," said Gregg Spiridellis of JibJab studios (http://www.jibjab.com), which creates online animation. "I haven't seen a campaign where there is really compelling content ... that secondarily drives a purchase." JibJab won national fame with its "This Land" spoof on U.S. presidential elections earlier this year. Viewers called up the film and its sequel 80 million times, according to the company, which has also worked on brand campaigns for Sony and Kraft. Spiridellis said Webisodes often work best by intriguing key consumer groups -- some of them influential in passing on a good word about a product -- rather than reaching the widest audience in the traditional model of television commercials. "TV will remain an important medium, but there are times when it's not appropriate, so you need other options," said David Lubars, chief creative officer at ad agency BBDO. Lubars was behind a series of short action films for BMW luxury cars three years ago during his tenure at the Fallon agency. In the films (http://www.bmwfilms.com), actor Clive Owen plays a deft driver escaping tricky situations in a BMW, and many consider them the gold standard of Web ads. Mercury's "Meet the Lucky Ones" is a new effort to excite heavy Internet users about a brand. The film is aimed at 20- to 30-year-olds who are spending more time on the Web than other media. In five weekly episodes that began Nov. 1, viewers follow the destinies of 10 interrelated characters and choose the order in which the story is told. The site gives details on Mercury cars, but the company's Mariner model only appears briefly in the films. "The customer asks to get involved ... and the obligation is to create stimulating content that allows them to come back and back again," said Jeff Grice, director of digital marketing at Wunderman Detroit, the ad agency that created the campaign. Mercury said its short films significantly raised traffic to its site, with more than 1 million visitors in the last month who also spent more time exploring its other contents. AMAZON THEATER Online retailer Amazon.com loaded its home page (http://www.amazon.com) with short films starring movie and television celebrities like Minnie Driver and Chris Noth, turning one of the most expensive Internet properties into a home theater during the holiday shopping season. In previous years, Amazon would use its coveted home page to spotlight products as gift ideas. "Amazon Theater," also designed by BBDO's Lubars, makes no direct plug, but end credits list products seen in the film and where to find them. "We made an investment in thanking our customers and also helping customers discover great content and products," said Kathy Savitt, a vice president at Amazon. Several million viewers clicked on the films in the first two weeks, she said. Other ventures featured comedian Jerry Seinfeld and cartoon hero Superman in vignettes promoting American Express, while Jaguar created a part-animation auto adventure (http://www.x-ingover.com). U.S. advertisers spent $5.6 billion on Internet ads in the first nine months of 2004, according to research firm TNS Media Intelligence/CMR. Internet films are not yet tracked, but executives involved in such projects say their production and promotion expenses can equal those of traditional TV spots. Lubars said ad agencies are gaining the special expertise needed to make Web films work: a combination of Hollywood-style scripting and marketing know-how. Just as important is creating a film that fits a personal computer. "It's got to be stuff you can see in a small box," he said. "And it can't be too long. The longer it has to go through the pipes, it becomes a glitchy, unpleasant experience." Others say the medium must evolve as its novelty fades. "Long-term, the idea of driving consumers to a special site to see a video ad isn't the best strategy," said JupiterResearch analyst Nate Elliott. "You want to go where the consumers are ... drop it into a piece of video content online that people are going to see at ESPN or Yahoo." *** FAIR USE NOTICE. This message contains copyrighted material the use of which has not been specifically authorized by the copyright owner. This Internet discussion group is making it available without profit to group members who have expressed a prior interest in receiving the included information in their efforts to advance the understanding of literary, educational, political, and economic issues, for non-profit research and educational purposes only. I believe that this constitutes a 'fair use' of the copyrighted material as provided for in section 107 of the U.S. Copyright Law. If you wish to use this copyrighted material for purposes of your own that go beyond 'fair use,' you must obtain permission from the copyright owner, in this instance, Reuters News Service.. For more information go to: http://www.law.cornell.edu/uscode/17/107.shtml ------------------------------ From: Lisa Minter Subject: Bush Signs Internet Access Tax Ban Into Law Date: Sat, 4 Dec 2004 11:44:09 EST WASHINGTON (Reuters) - President Bush signed a bill that renews a ban on Internet access taxes on Friday amid praise from lawmakers and trade groups who said the measure would encourage more people to sign up for high-speed broadband service. Bush said repeatedly on the campaign trail this year that a ban on access taxes is crucial to reach his goal of universal broadband access by 2007, enabling more Internet users to download video, music and other bandwidth-intensive content. The ban on access taxes, in place since 1998, expired more than a year ago when congressional lawmakers could not agree whether to make it permanent or merely extend it for three years. Backers at the time warned that Internet use could suffer if tax-happy states imposed new surcharges on the monthly fees that Internet providers like America Online Inc. charge their customers. But some senators said the ban would require states to raise taxes in other areas to make up for the millions of dollars they stand to lose as telephone service and other taxable activities migrate to the Internet. No states or local governments imposed new Internet taxes during the year the ban was not in effect. Congress approved a compromise last month that extends the ban until 2007 and extends it to cover broadband service. Existing broadband taxes will be gradually phased out. "It's an important step forward in bridging the economic digital divide," said Sen. George Allen, a Virginia Republican and a bill sponsor who attended the signing ceremony at the White House complex. "This measure will help make sure for those of lower income and those who live in small towns and rural areas that they can get connected more easily to broadband," he said. Broadband costs between $30 and $50 per month, compared with as little as $9.95 per month for regular dial-up access. Roughly 25 percent of U.S. adults have broadband access, up from 14 percent in 2002, according to the nonprofit Pew Internet and American Life Project. Overall Internet use during the same period has held steady at around 60 percent. Several technology-industry trade groups also praised Bush's action. (Additional reporting by Jeremy Pelofsky) *** FAIR USE NOTICE. This message contains copyrighted material the use of which has not been specifically authorized by the copyright owner. This Internet discussion group is making it available without profit to group members who have expressed a prior interest in receiving the included information in their efforts to advance the understanding of literary, educational, political, and economic issues, for non-profit research and educational purposes only. I believe that this constitutes a 'fair use' of the copyrighted material as provided for in section 107 of the U.S. Copyright Law. If you wish to use this copyrighted material for purposes of your own that go beyond 'fair use,' you must obtain permission from the copyright owner, in this instance Reuters News Service. For more information go to: http://www.law.cornell.edu/uscode/17/107.shtml ------------------------------ From: Lisa Minter Subject: Supreme Court to Decide Cable Internet Case Date: Sat, 4 Dec 2004 11:49:13 EST WASHINGTON (Reuters) - The U.S. Supreme Court said on Friday it would decide what regulations should apply to high-speed broadband Internet service offered by cable companies like Time Warner Inc., a key case that could decide whether such lines must be opened to competitors. The Federal Communications Commission ruled in 2002 that cable broadband was an information service and therefore free from most regulations that apply to traditional telephone services, which includes broadband. But the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit overturned that decision, relying on its previous ruling that broadband via cable companies had a telecommunications component and should be subject to stricter regulations. The high court will likely hear arguments in March, with a decision due by the end of June. Broadband, also offered by telephone carriers, is catching on among many U.S. consumers who want faster Internet service to, among other things, play music and videos. About 30 million Americans subscribe to the service, but the United States lags about a dozen countries in deployment. President Bush pledged during is campaign that he would push for universal access to broadband by 2007. The FCC argued the appeals court incorrectly overrode the agency and its expertise to oversee and regulate the telecommunications and media industry. It has tried to limit regulations on the service as a way to promote deployment. "High-speed Internet connections are not telephones," said FCC Chairman Michael Powell. "The 9th Circuit's decision would have grave consequences for the future and availability of high-speed Internet connections in this country." But independent Internet service providers and public interest groups have worried that, without some safeguards by the FCC, consumers would have limited choices for broadband service providers. EarthLink Inc., the No. 4 U.S. Internet service provider and a supporter of tougher cable rules, said that, despite the high court's decision to hear the case, it anticipated the appeals court would not be overturned. "This will settle the matter once and for all and finally give cable modem users a choice in high-speed Internet providers," said Dave Baker, vice president for law and public policy at EarthLink. (With additional reporting by Jim Vicini in Washington) *** FAIR USE NOTICE. This message contains copyrighted material the use of which has not been specifically authorized by the copyright owner. This Internet discussion group is making it available without profit to group members who have expressed a prior interest in receiving the included information in their efforts to advance the understanding of literary, educational, political, and economic issues, for non-profit research and educational purposes only. I believe that this constitutes a 'fair use' of the copyrighted material as provided for in section 107 of the U.S. Copyright Law. If you wish to use this copyrighted material for purposes of your own that go beyond 'fair use,' you must obtain permission from the copyright owner, in this instance Reuters News Service. For more information go to: http://www.law.cornell.edu/uscode/17/107.shtml ------------------------------ From: Lisa Minter Subject: U.S. Court Says Interior Dept. Can Stay Online Date: Sat, 4 Dec 2004 11:51:43 -0500 (EST) WASHINGTON (Reuters) - The U.S. Interior Department can keep its computers connected to the Internet despite the fact that hackers could manipulate royalty payments owed to American Indians for use of their land, an appeals court ruled on Friday. The U.S. Court of Appeals for the District of Columbia ruled that a lower court in March didn't give the Interior Department enough of a chance to make its case before ordering the agency to pull its Web sites and e-mail systems offline. Though an expert had shown that Indian trust funds could easily be tampered with by hackers, there was no evidence that anyone had actually tampered with the accounts, a three-judge appeals court panel said. Had the lower court considered evidence that the department had taken steps to improve its computer security, "there would have been no factual basis for disconnecting Interior's IT computer systems from the Internet," Appeals Court Judge Judith Rogers wrote. The appeals court has allowed Interior to stay online temporarily while it considered the case. Internet operations at the agency have been shut down three times since 2001, when a court-appointed investigator found that hackers could easily steal money from a system that allocates royalties to 300,000 Indians for use of their land. The blackouts stem from a class-action lawsuit between the agency and Indians who say that it lost track of billions of dollars in oil, gas and mineral royalty payments. A lawyer for the Indian plaintiffs said he would go back to the lower court and ask for a full hearing to determine the security of the Interior Department's computers. Attorney Keith Harper said the appeals court ruling actually helped his case because it found that the court has the authority to order Interior's computers offline if need be. The Interior Department had argued that the court did not have that power. "We strongly believe that there are still extraordinary (computer) security problems and they should be taken offline," Harper said. "This opens the door to that type of review further." In a prepared statement, the Interior Department said it was pleased with the ruling and would continue to upgrade computer security. *** FAIR USE NOTICE. This message contains copyrighted material the use of which has not been specifically authorized by the copyright owner. This Internet discussion group is making it available without profit to group members who have expressed a prior interest in receiving the included information in their efforts to advance the understanding of literary, educational, political, and economic issues, for non-profit research and educational purposes only. I believe that this constitutes a 'fair use' of the copyrighted material as provided for in section 107 of the U.S. Copyright Law. If you wish to use this copyrighted material for purposes of your own that go beyond 'fair use,' you must obtain permission from the copyright owner, in this instance, Reuters News Service. For more information go to: http://www.law.cornell.edu/uscode/17/107.shtml ------------------------------ From: sales@lanscapecorp.com (LanScape Sales Staff) Subject: VOIP Development Software/SDK - New Uupdates and Lower OEM Pricing Date: 4 Dec 2004 10:30:58 -0800 Organization: http://groups.google.com For SIP/RTP and VOIP application developers: LanScape Corporation has just completed that latest release of our LanScape VOIP Media Engine development software. With this development library/SDK you can develop SIP/RTP based voice over IP applications for any version of Microsoft Windows operating systems. The media engine is more than a protocol stack. It manages SIP and RTP traffic, call states, complex phone functionality, and much more. For those of you wanting to check it out immediately, Google the phrase "LanScape VOIP Media Engine" or go to http://www.lanscapecorp.com/ProductPages/LanScapeVoipMediaEngine.asp If you have to develop a multi line soft phone, voicemail server, media gateway or another similar type of VOIP application for Windows, our VOIP media engine is what you want. We have simplified the licensing and have adjusted the OEM price list for this product. Our goal is to offer you a cost effective development solution that will get you up and running quickly. It will not matter if you are a seasoned VOIP/SIP/RTP developer or a rookie. The VOIP development package we offer really simplifies the development task. To check out what the LanScape VOIP Media Engine can do for your application development, please go to our web site at http://www.lanscapecorp.com and look down the right side of the page for a headline that reads "LanScape VOIP Media Engine -- New pricing schedule in effect!" If you have any question, we ask that you email the sales department with your inquiries. If you would like to review the Media Engine's documentation, just ask and we will get you a current copy of the compiled HTML help file that comes with the product. In the mean time, you might want to look at a slightly outdated version of the API documents located at: http://www.lanscapecorp.com/DevResources/SoftwareDevRef/index.html We have many interesting VOIP applications that will be unveiled soon that are using the LanScape VOIP Media Engine SDK. You will be able to use these applications in your own VOIP systems or use them to extend the capabilities of user communities such as Free World Dialup. (http://www.freeworldialup.com) Thank you and happy VOIP-ing, LanScape Sales Staff ------------------------------ From: Tom Betz Subject: Re: Kicking the Avaya Habit Date: Sun, 5 Dec 2004 01:11:11 +0000 (UTC) Organization: Some Quoth Geoffrey Welsh in news:telecom23.578.1 @telecom-digest.org: > Hello, my name is Geoff and I'm an Avayaholic. You might think > that ending a business relationship with the mob or kicking a > drug habit is hard ... until you try cancelling a contract with > Avaya. Been there, done that, back when it was still called AT&T. It took years to get them to stop billing us. Some things never change. George Bush's War of Choice on Iraq is a totally unnecessary war. Every life lost, every limb lost, every disfigurement, every disability caused there is more blood on George W. Bush's hands, and on the hands of everyone who voted for George W. Bush. The more you know, the less likely you were to vote for Bush. Feeling a draft? For the facts on Iraq, see . ------------------------------ From: Tom Betz Subject: Re: Spam Gets Religion Date: Sun, 5 Dec 2004 01:18:48 UTC Organization: Some Quoth Patrick Townson in news:telecom23.575.13@telecom-digest.org: > E-mail recipients are increasingly being offered religious > salvation through bulk, unsolicited e-mail. The first widely recognized Usenet spam was religious in nature. Google Groups has it archived at . George Bush's War of Choice on Iraq is a totally unnecessary war. Every life lost, every limb lost, every disfigurement, every disability caused there is more blood on George W. Bush's hands, and on the hands of everyone who voted for George W. Bush. The more you know, the less likely you were to vote for Bush. Feeling a draft? For the facts on Iraq, see . ------------------------------ From: hancock4@bbs.cpcn.com (Lisa Hancock) Subject: Re: FAX vs VOIP Date: 4 Dec 2004 19:17:13 -0800 John McHarry wrote > I believe the issue with FAX over VOIP is that VOIP uses lossy > compression that does not treat FAX modulation gently. This tends to > be a problem over any compressed link. For those who don't know, there are two types of data compression techniques. One type preserves 100% of the original data; the other "lossy" accepts some loss of accuracy for increased compression efficiency. (Others can explain data compression better than I can.) I still use dial-up for certain connections, and even if I had VOIP I would still need to do so. I wonder if I even could. While my arrangement is growing rare these days, using fax machines as dial up is not. How do businesses that depend on VOIP use their fax machines? ------------------------------ TELECOM Digest is an electronic journal devoted mostly but not exclusively to telecommunications topics. It is circulated anywhere there is email, in addition to various telecom forums on a variety of networks such as Compuserve and America On Line, Yahoo Groups, and other forums. It is also gatewayed to Usenet where it appears as the moderated newsgroup 'comp.dcom.telecom'. TELECOM Digest is a not-for-profit, mostly non-commercial educational service offered to the Internet by Patrick Townson. All the contents of the Digest are compilation-copyrighted. You may reprint articles in some other media on an occasional basis, but please attribute my work and that of the original author. Contact information: Patrick Townson/TELECOM Digest Post Office Box 50 Independence, KS 67301 Phone: 620-402-0134 Fax 1: 775-255-9970 Fax 2: 530-309-7234 Fax 3: 208-692-5145 Email: editor@telecom-digest.org Subscribe: telecom-subscribe@telecom-digest.org Unsubscribe:telecom-unsubscribe@telecom-digest.org This Digest is the oldest continuing e-journal about telecomm- unications on the Internet, having been founded in August, 1981 and published continuously since then. Our archives are available for your review/research. We believe we are the oldest e-zine/mailing list on the internet in any category! URL information: http://telecom-digest.org Anonymous FTP: mirror.lcs.mit.edu/telecom-archives/archives/ (or use our mirror site: ftp.epix.net/pub/telecom-archives) Email <==> FTP: telecom-archives@telecom-digest.org Send a simple, one line note to that automated address for a help file on how to use the automatic retrieval system for archives files. You can get desired files in email. ************************************************************************* * TELECOM Digest is partially funded by a grant from * * Judith Oppenheimer, President of ICB Inc. and purveyor of accurate * * 800 & Dot Com News, Intelligence, Analysis, and Consulting. * * http://ICBTollFree.com, http://1800TheExpert.com * * Views expressed herein should not be construed as representing * * views of Judith Oppenheimer or ICB Inc. * ************************************************************************* ICB Toll Free News. Contact information is not sold, rented or leased. One click a day feeds a person a meal. Go to http://www.thehungersite.com Copyright 2004 ICB, Inc. and TELECOM Digest. All rights reserved. Our attorney is Bill Levant, of Blue Bell, PA. ************************ DIRECTORY ASSISTANCE JUST 65 CENTS ONE OR TWO INQUIRIES CHARGED TO YOUR CREDIT CARD! REAL TIME, UP TO DATE! SPONSORED BY TELECOM DIGEST AND EASY411.COM SIGN UP AT http://www.easy411.com/telecomdigest ! ************************ --------------------------------------------------------------- Finally, the Digest is funded by gifts from generous readers such as yourself who provide funding in amounts deemed appropriate. Your help is important and appreciated. A suggested donation of fifty dollars per year per reader is considered appropriate. See our address above. Please make at least a single donation to cover the cost of processing your name to the mailing list. All opinions expressed herein are deemed to be those of the author. Any organizations listed are for identification purposes only and messages should not be considered any official expression by the organization. ****************************** End of TELECOM Digest V23 #579 From editor@telecom-digest.org Sun Dec 5 23:55:18 2004 Received: (from ptownson@localhost) by massis.lcs.mit.edu (8.11.6p3/8.11.6) id iB64tIX18694; Sun, 5 Dec 2004 23:55:18 -0500 (EST) Date: Sun, 5 Dec 2004 23:55:18 -0500 (EST) From: editor@telecom-digest.org Message-Id: <200412060455.iB64tIX18694@massis.lcs.mit.edu> X-Authentication-Warning: massis.lcs.mit.edu: ptownson set sender to editor@telecom-digest.org using -f To: ptownson Approved: patsnewlist Subject: TELECOM Digest V23 #580 TELECOM Digest Sun, 5 Dec 2004 23:56:00 EST Volume 23 : Issue 580 Inside This Issue: Editor: Patrick A. Townson Kazaa Offering Free VOIP Calls (Marcus Didius Falco) What is an AT&T RTSLS? (DevEhf) Service Providers (Bob Phillips) Re: FAX vs VOIP (DevilsPGD) Re: FAX vs VOIP (Lonewolf) Re: Lingo Voip SUCKS! (Tony P.) Re: Lingo Voip SUCKS! (Wesrock@aol.com) Re: Bill of Rights Day Dinner 12/15 (Lisa Hancock) Telecom and VOIP (Voice over Internet Protocol) Digest for the Internet. All contents here are copyrighted by Patrick Townson and the individual writers/correspondents. Articles may be used in other journals or newsgroups, provided the writer's name and the Digest are included in the fair use quote. By using -any name or email address- included herein for -any- reason other than responding to an article herein, you agree to pay a hundred dollars to the recipients of the email. =========================== Addresses herein are not to be added to any mailing list, nor to be sold or given away without explicit written consent. Chain letters, viruses, porn, spam, and miscellaneous junk are definitely unwelcome. We must fight spam for the same reason we fight crime: not because we are naive enough to believe that we will ever stamp it out, but because we do not want the kind of world that results when no one stands against crime. Geoffrey Welsh =========================== See the bottom of this issue for subscription and archive details and the name of our lawyer; other stuff of interest. ---------------------------------------------------------------------- Date: Sun, 05 Dec 2004 19:07:33 -0500 From: Marcus Didius Falco Subject: Kazaa Offering Free VOIP calls http://news.yahoo.com/news?tmpl=story&cid=528&u=/ap/20041129/ap_on_hi_te/kazaa_internet_calls&printer=1 By ALEX VEIGA, AP Business Writer LOS ANGELES - Free Internet-based phone calls are the newest feature of the popular Kazaa file-sharing program. The offering, in a software upgrade this week, comes as Kazaa's maker, Sharman Networks Ltd., faces increasing pressure to retain a user base eroded by rising competition from other file-sharing services and a full-court press by the recording industry. Many of the computer users sued by the industry were using Kazaa, which was once regarded as the largest file-swapping community. The main reason behind Sharman's foray into Internet-based phone service could be to prove that file-sharing technology has significant commercial uses other than as an unauthorized delivery system for copyright content, said Phil Leigh, senior analyst at Inside Digital Media. That could help bolster Sharman against lawsuits brought by the entertainment industry in the United States and Australia. Alan Morris, executive vice president of Sharman Networks in Sydney, Australia, denied any effort to legitimize Kazaa by adding Internet phone calling. "The notion that we do something as major as that for any reason other than straightforward commercial reasons is no, absolutely not," Morris said. "There's absolutely no way, you go 'OK, this will be really good if they criticize us.'" Internet-based phone calls travel in data packets online instead of being carried through analog telephone lines. Sharman incorporated calling technology developed by Skype Technologies S.A., whose co-founders created Kazaa before selling it to Sharman. ------------------------------ From: fosterdave@hotmail.com (DevEhf) Subject: What is an AT&T RTSLS? Date: 5 Dec 2004 10:49:41 -0800 Organization: http://groups.google.com I've seen the acronym RTSLS after the names of AT&T execs. What does this designation mean? Thanks, Dave ------------------------------ From: phil1630@bellsouth.net (Bob Phillips) Subject: Service Providers Date: 5 Dec 2004 15:11:34 -0800 Organization: http://groups.google.com I've been working on an application to dispatch service orders via Blackberry devices. Does anyone have an opinion on the various service providers out there? Thanks -Bob ------------------------------ From: DevilsPGD Subject: Re: FAX vs VOIP Date: Sat, 04 Dec 2004 20:52:43 -0700 Organization: Posted via Supernews, http://www.supernews.com In message hancock4@bbs.cpcn.com (Lisa Hancock) wrote: > While my arrangement is growing rare these days, using fax machines as > dial up is not. How do businesses that depend on VOIP use their fax > machines? Outsource fax, or a small number of dedicated fax lines to a traditional telco. -- This space intentionally left blank. ------------------------------ From: Lonewolf Subject: Re: FAX vs VOIP Organization: Comcast Online Date: Sun, 05 Dec 2004 12:14:32 GMT I'm on the repair side of VoIP and over the past year or so I'm seeing quite a few installations using T.38 faxing with VoIP. It appears to becoming fairly popular and aside for some verdor specific issues, it appears to work quite well. Lisa Hancock wrote in message news:telecom23.579.14@telecom-digest.org: > John McHarry wrote >> I believe the issue with FAX over VOIP is that VOIP uses lossy >> compression that does not treat FAX modulation gently. This tends to >> be a problem over any compressed link. > For those who don't know, there are two types of data compression > techniques. One type preserves 100% of the original data; the other > "lossy" accepts some loss of accuracy for increased compression > efficiency. (Others can explain data compression better than I can.) > I still use dial-up for certain connections, and even if I had VOIP I > would still need to do so. I wonder if I even could. > While my arrangement is growing rare these days, using fax machines as > dial up is not. How do businesses that depend on VOIP use their fax > machines? ------------------------------ From: Tony P. Subject: Re: Lingo Voip SUCKS! Organization: ATCC Date: Sat, 4 Dec 2004 23:49:43 -0500 In article , hancock4@bbs.cpcn.com says: > Tony P. wrote >> I'm 25 days out from my switch to Vonage and my number still hasn't >> been ported. >> I've been talking to the PUC, Verizon, Vonage etc. What I've gotten >> from this is a clear picture of the anti-competitive nature of Verizon >> and the structure of Vonage's network. > FWIW, a friend of mine switched from Verizon to a competitive carrier > several times (back and forth while he made up his mind) and never had > any trouble. >> It seems that Verizon only has to do rapid LNP with other FCC regulated >> carriers. If you're not FCC regulated they can take as long as they want >> and delay for whatever reason they wish because they're free of >> regulatory burden. > If Verizon is not under any legal obligation to make the switch in a > timely manner, then it is not their fault and you have no basis to sue > them. You have definitely drunk the koolaid. Rules should be applied equally be the carrier FCC regulated or not. > Suppose the VOIP carrier fails to meet technical standards. Will a > subscriber blame Verizon instead of the VOIP carrier? That makes for > extra unnecessary and unprofitable work for Verizon which other > subscribers have to make up the cost. Again -- any switch built since what, 1989 has been IP aware. As it is now, Vonage utilizes capacity on Paetec and Focal Communications switches which in some cases are actually just resellers of Verizon services. All I'm asking for is to break free of the behemoth. > I'm sorry I'm not sympathetic, but it's a double standard. The FCC > declared the VOIP carriers to be free of regulation. That means > they're on their own while other carriers have to put up with the > expense of regulation. Maybe you could avoid Verizon altogether and > use broadband cable instead, as some people are doing. They wanted that regulation in return for regular profit. Of course now they just rape the consumer with these add on fees that in reality flow right back into the pockets of the carrier. The line charge is an example of egregious overcharging by the way. Had you read the thread you would have known that it was my intention to ditch Verizon completely. Already have Cox hooked up and running. > Indeed, it was not that hard for our cable company to lay a > replacement broadband fiber optic cable through our area; and now -- > in competition to Verizon DSL -- they offer high speed Internet. As > such, perhaps another carrier could do likewise and eliminate that > "final mile" contention. > [Just to set the record, I am not connected with Verizon other than > being a subscriber. Indeed, I was unhappy with other LD carriers and > switched to Verizon for all services.] You certainly sound like a Verizon apologist. ------------------------------ From: Wesrock@aol.com Date: Sun, 5 Dec 2004 10:26:26 EST Subject: Re: Lingo Voip SUCKS! In a message dated Sat, 04 Dec 2004 15:47:39 -0500, Fred R. Goldstein writes: > And in any case, the Bells are weaning themselves of LD access > revenues anyway. It's only the rural telcos, who get high fees from > the LD carriers, who are worried. This is a tradition that goes far back. When I was with SBC in Texas, there was a suspicion the owner of one small telephone company had called a number (any number) in the nearby Bell toll center time after time all day because the subsidy from Bell would be greater than his costs. Wes Leatherock wesrock@aol.com wleathus@yahoo.com ------------------------------ From: hancock4@bbs.cpcn.com (Lisa Hancock) Subject: Re: Bill of Rights Day Dinner 12/15 Date: 5 Dec 2004 09:47:56 -0800 Organization: http://groups.google.com Joseph wrote: > Are we celebrating its demise as well? That seems to be the direction > we're going with the present administration in the White House. It is important to remember that our civil rights are all _relative_ and must be balanced against each other. No right is unlimited. For example, your right of free speech must be balanced against my freedom from harassment and private property (the old "yelling fire in a crowded theatre" argument). We look back 50 years ago and often are horrified at things that went on in those days -- things that almost everyone at the time approved of. Who knows what they'll say about our generation 50 years from now? [TELECOM Digest Editor's Note: Lisa, perhaps you are getting the topic of civil *RIGHTS* confused with civil *LIBERTIES*. They are two different things. Do you know the difference between 'civil liberties' and 'civil rights'? And yes, things were pretty horrid for a lot of people fifty years ago in the USA. Regards the 'shouting fire in a crowded theatre' argument, the more contemporary version of that would be calling 911 to report a false fire alarm; a very distasteful thing to do which is NOT covered by any discussion of 'free speech'. And it is beyond the scope of this Digest to spend *very much* time on Bush's politics (as tempted as I have been on occassion) but perhaps you and other readers will explain the difference between 'civil liberties' and 'civil rights'. In the meantime, don't forget that December 15 is 'Bill of Rights Day' here in the USA. Celebrate it as you wish, I guess; either its longevity if you are an optimist or its demise if you are as concerned as many folks about the last election, and in any event tell http://jpfo.org what you have planned in your community. PAT] ------------------------------ TELECOM Digest is an electronic journal devoted mostly but not exclusively to telecommunications topics. It is circulated anywhere there is email, in addition to various telecom forums on a variety of networks such as Compuserve and America On Line, Yahoo Groups, and other forums. It is also gatewayed to Usenet where it appears as the moderated newsgroup 'comp.dcom.telecom'. TELECOM Digest is a not-for-profit, mostly non-commercial educational service offered to the Internet by Patrick Townson. All the contents of the Digest are compilation-copyrighted. You may reprint articles in some other media on an occasional basis, but please attribute my work and that of the original author. Contact information: Patrick Townson/TELECOM Digest Post Office Box 50 Independence, KS 67301 Phone: 620-402-0134 Fax 1: 775-255-9970 Fax 2: 530-309-7234 Fax 3: 208-692-5145 Email: editor@telecom-digest.org Subscribe: telecom-subscribe@telecom-digest.org Unsubscribe:telecom-unsubscribe@telecom-digest.org This Digest is the oldest continuing e-journal about telecomm- unications on the Internet, having been founded in August, 1981 and published continuously since then. Our archives are available for your review/research. We believe we are the oldest e-zine/mailing list on the internet in any category! URL information: http://telecom-digest.org Anonymous FTP: mirror.lcs.mit.edu/telecom-archives/archives/ (or use our mirror site: ftp.epix.net/pub/telecom-archives) Email <==> FTP: telecom-archives@telecom-digest.org Send a simple, one line note to that automated address for a help file on how to use the automatic retrieval system for archives files. You can get desired files in email. ************************************************************************* * TELECOM Digest is partially funded by a grant from * * Judith Oppenheimer, President of ICB Inc. and purveyor of accurate * * 800 & Dot Com News, Intelligence, Analysis, and Consulting. * * http://ICBTollFree.com, http://1800TheExpert.com * * Views expressed herein should not be construed as representing * * views of Judith Oppenheimer or ICB Inc. * ************************************************************************* ICB Toll Free News. Contact information is not sold, rented or leased. One click a day feeds a person a meal. Go to http://www.thehungersite.com Copyright 2004 ICB, Inc. and TELECOM Digest. All rights reserved. Our attorney is Bill Levant, of Blue Bell, PA. ************************ DIRECTORY ASSISTANCE JUST 65 CENTS ONE OR TWO INQUIRIES CHARGED TO YOUR CREDIT CARD! REAL TIME, UP TO DATE! SPONSORED BY TELECOM DIGEST AND EASY411.COM SIGN UP AT http://www.easy411.com/telecomdigest ! ************************ --------------------------------------------------------------- Finally, the Digest is funded by gifts from generous readers such as yourself who provide funding in amounts deemed appropriate. Your help is important and appreciated. A suggested donation of fifty dollars per year per reader is considered appropriate. See our address above. Please make at least a single donation to cover the cost of processing your name to the mailing list. All opinions expressed herein are deemed to be those of the author. Any organizations listed are for identification purposes only and messages should not be considered any official expression by the organization. End of TELECOM Digest V23 #580 ****************************** From editor@telecom-digest.org Mon Dec 6 14:20:12 2004 Received: (from ptownson@localhost) by massis.lcs.mit.edu (8.11.6p3/8.11.6) id iB6JKCm27084; Mon, 6 Dec 2004 14:20:12 -0500 (EST) Date: Mon, 6 Dec 2004 14:20:12 -0500 (EST) From: editor@telecom-digest.org Message-Id: <200412061920.iB6JKCm27084@massis.lcs.mit.edu> X-Authentication-Warning: massis.lcs.mit.edu: ptownson set sender to editor@telecom-digest.org using -f To: ptownson Approved: patsnewlist Subject: TELECOM Digest V23 #581 TELECOM Digest Mon, 6 Dec 2004 14:20:00 EST Volume 23 : Issue 581 Inside This Issue: Editor: Patrick A. Townson Telecom Update (Canada) #460, December 3, 2004 (Angus TeleManagement) Better Phone System (starrtelcom) Kudos to New York Attorney General (David O. Rodriguez) Re: Lingo Voip SUCKS! (Garth Nospam) Countering the "Lingo Sucks" Thread (Ted Koppel) Re: FAX vs VOIP (Tim@Backhome.org) Re: OnStar Frequency of Use (Tim@Backhome.org) R2 Signalling (mara) Re: What is an AT&T RTSLS? (Wesrock@aol.com) Re: Kicking the Avaya Habit (david_esan@hotmail.com) Re: Kicking the Avaya Habit (Paul A Lee) Norstar Sharing With Predictive Dialer (Ferodom) Telecom and VOIP (Voice over Internet Protocol) Digest for the Internet. All contents here are copyrighted by Patrick Townson and the individual writers/correspondents. Articles may be used in other journals or newsgroups, provided the writer's name and the Digest are included in the fair use quote. By using -any name or email address- included herein for -any- reason other than responding to an article herein, you agree to pay a hundred dollars to the recipients of the email. =========================== Addresses herein are not to be added to any mailing list, nor to be sold or given away without explicit written consent. Chain letters, viruses, porn, spam, and miscellaneous junk are definitely unwelcome. We must fight spam for the same reason we fight crime: not because we are naive enough to believe that we will ever stamp it out, but because we do not want the kind of world that results when no one stands against crime. Geoffrey Welsh =========================== See the bottom of this issue for subscription and archive details and the name of our lawyer; other stuff of interest. ---------------------------------------------------------------------- Date: Mon, 06 Dec 2004 09:44:23 -0500 From: Angus TeleManagement Group Subject: Telecom Update (Canada) #460, December 3, 2004 ************************************************************ TELECOM UPDATE ************************************************************ published weekly by Angus TeleManagement Group http://www.angustel.ca Number 460: December 3, 2004 Publication of Telecom Update is made possible by generous financial support from: ** ALLSTREAM: www.allstream.com ** AVAYA: www.avaya.ca/en/ ** BELL CANADA: www.bell.ca ** CISCO SYSTEMS CANADA: www.cisco.com/ca/ ** ERICSSON: www.ericsson.ca ** MITEL NETWORKS: www.mitel.com/ ** SPRINT CANADA: www.sprint.ca ** UTC CANADA: www.canada.utc.org/ ************************************************************ IN THIS ISSUE: ** Verizon to Sell Stake in Telus ** Bell to Test Fixed-Mobile Wireless Service ** Mitel Upgrades Teleworker Products ** B.C. Broadband Wireless Providers Merge ** Rogers Offers Text-to-Speech Calling ** Telus Intros Internet Fax Service ** Embree Named CAIP Spokesperson ** Cogeco Plans Phone Service in 2005 ** Satellite Broadband Service Launched ** NorthernTel, Telebec Fund Wireless Research ** Emergis Drops BCE From Name ** Reinventing Telecom Management Again ============================================================ VERIZON TO SELL STAKE IN TELUS: U.S. telecom giant Verizon Communications has announced plans to sell its 20.5% equity interest in Telus Corporation by mid-December. Verizon expects to receive C$2.24 Billion from the sale. BELL TO TEST FIXED-MOBILE WIRELESS SERVICE: Bell Canada and Chicago-based BridgePort Networks have announced plans to test a combined CDMA and Wi-Fi wireless telephone service in the first half of 2005. The service would allow customers to use the same handset on Bell's public wireless network and on Bell Sympatico's DSL wireless home network. MITEL UPGRADES TELEWORKER PRODUCTS: Release 3 of Mitel's Teleworker product line adds local PSTN connectivity, remote video conferencing, local voice streaming for remote offices, and new reporting capabilities. Teleworker permits a remote location to use the features of Mitel PBXs over a broadband Internet access. B.C. BROADBAND WIRELESS PROVIDERS MERGE: Universco Broadband Solutions and AirCelerator Wireless have merged to form MetroBridge Networks, which provides fixed wireless broadband at up to 1 Gbps to 400 customers across Greater Vancouver. ROGERS OFFERS TEXT-TO-SPEECH CALLING: Rogers Wireless has launched TXT 2 Landline, which enables a user to send a text message to a landline phone anywhere in Canada and the continental U.S. The messages are converted to voice and delivered in either English or French. TELUS INTROS INTERNET FAX SERVICE: Telus has introduced a service that lets users send and receive fax messages as e-mail attachments. The service is operated by Ottawa-based Protus IP Solutions. EMBREE NAMED CAIP SPOKESPERSON: Kirsten Embree, a partner with Fraser Milner Casgrain, has become a national spokesperson of the Canadian Association of Internet Providers, a division of CATAalliance. COGECO PLANS PHONE SERVICE IN 2005: Cogeco CEO Louis Audet says that the cableco is now testing an Internet telephone service and intends to launch it next year. Cogeco expects that 15% of its cable customers will subscribe to its phone service by the end of the decade. (See Telecom Update #428) SATELLITE BROADBAND SERVICE LAUNCHED: New Brunswick-based Barrett Xplore now offers Xplornet, an enterprise-grade satellite broadband service that delivers up to 1.5 Mbps download and 256 Kbps upload for $359/month. NORTHERNTEL, TELEBEC FUND WIRELESS RESEARCH: NorthernTel and Telebec are investing $1 million for research on wireless communications in underground mines, to be carried out by the Universite du Quebec en Abitibi-Temiscamingue. EMERGIS DROPS BCE FROM NAME: BCE Emergis shareholders have approved a change in the company's name to Emergis Inc. BCE sold its interest in the e-business company earlier this year. (See Telecom Update #438) REINVENTING TELECOM MANAGEMENT AGAIN: "We begin with one fundamental and indisputable fact: enterprise telecom and networking are in the midst of truly radical change." The current issue of Telemanagement features a exclusive report by Ian Angus and Henry Dortmans on effective strategies for enterprise network and telecom management in 2005. Also in this issue: ** Avaya and Mitel: Two Strategies for IP Success ** Opening Enterprise Wi-Fi Nets to Guests and Customers These important reports are available to Telemanagement subscribers only. To subscribe today, call 1-800-263-4415 ext 500 or go to www.angustel.ca/teleman/tm-sub-online.html. ============================================================ HOW TO SUBMIT ITEMS FOR TELECOM UPDATE E-MAIL: editors@angustel.ca FAX: 905-686-2655 MAIL: TELECOM UPDATE Angus TeleManagement Group 8 Old Kingston Road Ajax, Ontario Canada L1T 2Z7 =========================================================== HOW TO SUBSCRIBE (OR UNSUBSCRIBE) TELECOM UPDATE is provided in electronic form only. There are two formats available: 1. The fully-formatted edition is posted on the World Wide Web on the first business day of the week at www.angustel.ca 2. The e-mail edition is distributed free of charge. To subscribe, send an e-mail message to: join-telecom_update@nova.sparklist.com To stop receiving the e-mail edition, send an e-mail message to: leave-telecom_update@nova.sparklist.com Sending e-mail to these addresses will automatically add or remove the sender's e-mail address from the list. Leave subject line and message area blank. We do not give Telecom Update subscribers' e-mail addresses to any third party. For more information, see www.angustel.ca/update/privacy.html. =========================================================== COPYRIGHT AND CONDITIONS OF USE: All contents copyright 2004 Angus TeleManagement Group Inc. All rights reserved. For further information, including permission to reprint or reproduce, please e-mail rosita@angustel.ca or phone 905-686-5050 ext 500. The information and data included has been obtained from sources which we believe to be reliable, but Angus TeleManagement makes no warranties or representations whatsoever regarding accuracy, completeness, or adequacy. Opinions expressed are based on interpretation of available information, and are subject to change. If expert advice on the subject matter is required, the services of a competent professional should be obtained. ============================================================ JOHN RIDDELL jriddell@angustel.ca Angus TeleManagement Group http://www.angustel.ca 8 Old Kingston Road Tel: 905-686-5050 x226 Ajax Ontario L1T 2Z7 Canada Fax: 905-686-2655 ------------------------------ From: starrtelcom Subject: Better Phone System Date: 6 Dec 2004 07:32:43 -0800 Organization: http://groups.google.com I may be biased, but its sad to see so many companies and IT techs get snowballed by the pitches from Avaya, Nortel, and Cisco - all of whom have been in the telephony industry for years, but still have not had the courage or the respect to truly cater to their customers and their desires. We will change that for you and we have for others. Televantage may not be the most well-known product in the world -- but its been around and its getting noticed -- www.starrtelcom.com -- I am a reseller of this spectacular phone system. Tired of the Avaya, Nortel, Cisco and other propietary traps that get you sucked into dictating, expensive contracts? This may sound too good to be true, but there is a better way -- www.starrtelcom.com. We offer a non-propietary, no-contract, open-source solution that allows the user to dictate how they want the phone system to work and even allows the user to change it to their specific needs, without a contract, without being stuck to propietary equipment and without having to be a slave to the schedule of a service tech. No kidding! No strings! Dont believe it? Call me personally at 214-868-3549 to hear for yourself or visit us on the web at www.starrtelcom.com. We know that the other companies have made similar promises, but we arent interested in just making good on what we say -- we are wanting to change the telecom industry and the way IT professionals view and use telecom solutions. Dont knock it til you've tried it -- regardless of what you've heard or what the 'other companies' want you to hear. We stand by our product and its promises. Chris McLean Starrtelcom.com 214-868-3549 ------------------------------ From: David O. Rodriguez Date: Mon, 06 Dec 2004 12:39:16 -0500 Subject: Kudos to New York Attorney General I just read that New York Attorney General Eliot Spitzer negotiated with GE Capital to eliminate the lease payments for the NorVergence MATRIX. GE Capital is even going to refund money. Hopefully all other finacial institutions and all other states involved will follow this example. Now if some agency could follow up on the Salzanos. [TELECOM Digest Editor's Note: As I have been saying for literally *months* here, put a total freeze on your accounts payable due to Norvergence and its fraudulent leases. I am sure when Spitzer 'negotiated' with GE Capital he actually put a hard squeeze on them due to sins of their own in other matters; offering to forgive their sins on those matters in exchange for their cooperation on the Norvergence matter. Very few, if any, of the creditors had clean hands and pure motives in the Norvergence incident. If they all get off as cheaply as GE Capital, by forgiving the leases and refunding what they had already scammed from business people, they'll be lucky indeed. PAT] ------------------------------ From: garth@humboldt.net (Garth Nospam) Subject: Re: Lingo Voip SUCKS! Date: 5 Dec 2004 22:35:32 -0800 Organization: http://groups.google.com Well let me state that Lingo still SUCKS! I'm always happy to blame Verizon whenever possible but I think in my case Primus (Lingo) is being run in very non business friendly way. Now remember, it took Lingo 40+ days to tell me they could not port my phone number to their system. I checked around with other Voip companies and even Verizon's Voip service. None of them support porting my number including Verizon who provides me my local service and current number! How long did it take all the other company's to tell me this? NOT 40 DAYS! About 30 sec with a built in search function on their web pages!!! Now tell me Lingo is not scamming people with their $39.90 disconnect charge. -Garth ------------------------------ Date: Mon, 06 Dec 2004 09:25:21 -0500 From: Ted Koppel Subject: Countering the "Lingo Sucks" Thread I'm a little bothered by the recent Lingo Sucks thread that has been rolling through the TD the last couple of days. Let's get serious -- the inability to successfully port a Verizon phone number to Lingo is *not* Lingo's fault -- it is clearly and incontestibly Verizon's. (Among other postings, see mine of early October about trying to get Verizon to do their job.) If you're going to complain about Lingo, at least do it for real reasons: - still not sending callerID *name* (although they are sending number) on outgoing calls - still not passing callerID *name* on incoming calls - occasional overmodulation on calls (one side too loud) - ATA device needs to be reset/powered down about once a week Still, I have had Lingo for almost 5 months, and I would have to give my service a strong B-plus. Ted ------------------------------ From: Tim@Backhome.org Subject: Re: FAX vs VOIP Date: Mon, 06 Dec 2004 06:09:34 -0800 Organization: Cox Communications My 3-year old FAX machine works fine on my Vonage service. Lisa Hancock wrote: > John McHarry wrote >> I believe the issue with FAX over VOIP is that VOIP uses lossy >> compression that does not treat FAX modulation gently. This tends to >> be a problem over any compressed link. > For those who don't know, there are two types of data compression > techniques. One type preserves 100% of the original data; the other > "lossy" accepts some loss of accuracy for increased compression > efficiency. (Others can explain data compression better than I can.) > I still use dial-up for certain connections, and even if I had VOIP I > would still need to do so. I wonder if I even could. > While my arrangement is growing rare these days, using fax machines as > dial up is not. How do businesses that depend on VOIP use their fax > machines? ------------------------------ From: Tim@Backhome.org Subject: Re: OnStar Frequency of Use Date: Mon, 06 Dec 2004 06:10:49 -0800 Organization: Cox Communications Those GM executives must be desperate. ;-) Good Housekeeping "Good Buy" award? Which is the fox, and which is the chicken coop? Monty Solomon wrote: > OnStar Achieves Another First as Winner of Good Housekeeping's > 'Good Buy' Award for Best Service > NEW YORK, Dec. 3 /PRNewswire/ -- OnStar by General Motors was awarded > the "Good Buy" Award from the Good Housekeeping Institute (GHI) today. > OnStar is the first service ever acknowledged in GHI's new "best > service" category. This is the first time any automotive product or > service has been become an award winner since the "Good Buy" award > program began ten years ago. > Each month on average, OnStar receives about 700 airbag notifications > and 11,000 emergency assistance calls, which include 4,000 Good > Samaritan calls for a variety of emergency situations. In addition, > each month OnStar advisors respond to an average of 500 stolen vehicle > location requests, 20,000 requests for roadside assistance, 36,000 > remote door-unlock requests and 19,000 GM Goodwrench remote > diagnostics requests. > - http://finance.lycos.com/home/news/story.asp?story=45410120 ------------------------------ From: mara Subject: R2 Signalling Date: Mon, 6 Dec 2004 15:25:40 +0100 Organization: lubman Hi, I have a question. Where are transmitted the multifrequency signals? (Time slot 16 uses four status bits for signaling purposes -- Supervisory Signals). Interregister Signalling -- I don't know. Time slot 16 in frame 0 is used for Super Frame alignment. Maybe in the next frames (1 through 15)? Thanks for help. ------------------------------ From: Wesrock@aol.com Date: Mon, 6 Dec 2004 09:36:47 EST Subject: Re: What is an AT&T RTSLS? In a message dated 5 Dec 2004 10:49:41 -0800, fosterdave@hotmail.com (DevEhf) writes: > I've seen the acronym RTSLS after the names of AT&T execs. What does > this designation mean? > Thanks, > Dave Is it RTSLS pronounceable? If not, it's not an acronym, and I can't think of any way to pronounce it. Wes Leatherock wesrock@aol.com wleathus@yahoo.com ------------------------------ From: david_esan@hotmail.com Subject: Re: Kicking the Avaya Habit Date: 6 Dec 2004 08:45:37 -0800 Organization: http://groups.google.com Why did you wait so long between phone calls? After their first screw up, I would have faxed the cancellation and then called 10 minutes later to make sure they had the fax, and continued to call until they confirmed receipt. I agree with PAT -- after a while the US mail receipts become useful. Why did you not escalate the problem? Ask for the A's or B's supervisor. Ask for their supervisor. Call the office of the president of Avaya and explain why you're gonna toss their equipment and never purchase from them again. They are well aware of what I call the IBM effect -- everyone bought IBM only because that's what everyone else bought. (Recursive thinking? Of course, but that's the CYA/risk minimizing mentality. Wonder why it took so long for UNIX to take hold?) Where is your copy of the first cancellation? Find it, refuse to pay the bill and enclose copies of it with each refusal. Make them work for their money. You certainly are, and you shouldn't give your company's money away. Avaya is walking all over you, and you're saying, Thank you sir, may I have another? The world is full of bureaucrats who have forgotten what their job is supposed to be about, and think that the important thing is to move the documents from the in-basket to the out-basket. You need to remind them what their job is about -- making sure that the documents they are moving, which represent something important to you (and should be equally important to them) are filled in correctly before they are moved. ------------------------------ From: Paul A Lee Subject: Re: Kicking the Avaya Habit Date: Mon, 6 Dec 2004 12:17:47 -0500 Organization: Rite Aid Corporation In TELECOM Digest V23 #578, Geoffrey Welsh wrote (in part): > ... am I right to suspect that Avaya is intentionally and > systematically interfering with legitimate attempts to cancel > contracts, perhaps because they feel they have nothing to lose > and continuing payments to gain? In our case they lost an > opportunity to sell a maintenance contract for the very same > system in a different location, and a lasting impression on > me that will make me try to avoid dealing with Avaya ever again. > I share my story in the hopes that someone will learn from > our mistake and not get hooked the way we did. I suggest you tell your story to the Avaya Customer Response Team at 800-784-6104 or 908-953-6000 ('1' for "customer", then '9' for CRT). Or, email them at (note the missing 'e' at the end of "office"), giving all the identifying numbers and information and a description of the problem and your experiences with it. Avaya has been going through a lot of changes in recent years. In the process, the nature of the problems customers have with them and the way of getting help with those problems have changed somewhat, too. The best way I have found to deal with any billing or contract renewal issues (if your account executive or business partner or a few phone calls don't get the required resolution) is to go straight to the Customer Response Team. In my 15 years of dealing with Avaya (and Lucent and AT&T), I've found that numerous aspects of their billing and sales, and a few portions of their web site, can be agonizingly difficult to deal with. However, I have found their equipment, software, documentation, service, and support are almost always exceptional. I've dealt with other companies whose best efforts come from their marketing, sales, and billing operations, while their actual products and services languish in mediocrity or worse. If I have to choose the lesser of two headaches, I'll take the billing problems. (This is my own experience and opinion and does not necessarily reflect any organizational endorsement of Avaya or any other vendor.) Paul A Lee Sr Telecom Engineer Rite Aid Corporation HL-IS-COM (Telecomm) V: +1 717 730-8355 30 Hunter Lane, Camp Hill, PA 17011-2410 F: +1 717 975-3789 P.O. Box 3165, Harrisburg, PA 17105-3165 W: +1 717 805-6208 [TELECOM Digest Editor's Note: Has anyone ever observed how approximatly half of the employees at any given company are there solely to correct mistakes made by the other half? And a large number of those hired to correct mistakes have to correct the errors of the first bunch of correctors (i.e. customer response teams, etc). I wonder how things would go if companies thoroughly and completely trained the fifty percent of the work force they would need if they did it that way to start with? PAT] ------------------------------ From: ferodom Subject: Norstar Sharing With Predictive Dialer Date: 6 Dec 2004 10:51:09 -0800 I have two T1's they both are PRI and NI-2 protocol. I have a predictive dialer with a dual t1 Dialogic card in it and a MICS norstar. Therefore one pri is going directly to the predictive dialer and the second one is going to the Norstar what I am trying to accomplish is to share some line of the second pri with the dialer trough a second t1 card. Please help. Fernando ------------------------------ TELECOM Digest is an electronic journal devoted mostly but not exclusively to telecommunications topics. It is circulated anywhere there is email, in addition to various telecom forums on a variety of networks such as Compuserve and America On Line, Yahoo Groups, and other forums. It is also gatewayed to Usenet where it appears as the moderated newsgroup 'comp.dcom.telecom'. TELECOM Digest is a not-for-profit, mostly non-commercial educational service offered to the Internet by Patrick Townson. All the contents of the Digest are compilation-copyrighted. You may reprint articles in some other media on an occasional basis, but please attribute my work and that of the original author. Contact information: Patrick Townson/TELECOM Digest Post Office Box 50 Independence, KS 67301 Phone: 620-402-0134 Fax 1: 775-255-9970 Fax 2: 530-309-7234 Fax 3: 208-692-5145 Email: editor@telecom-digest.org Subscribe: telecom-subscribe@telecom-digest.org Unsubscribe:telecom-unsubscribe@telecom-digest.org This Digest is the oldest continuing e-journal about telecomm- unications on the Internet, having been founded in August, 1981 and published continuously since then. Our archives are available for your review/research. We believe we are the oldest e-zine/mailing list on the internet in any category! URL information: http://telecom-digest.org Anonymous FTP: mirror.lcs.mit.edu/telecom-archives/archives/ (or use our mirror site: ftp.epix.net/pub/telecom-archives) Email <==> FTP: telecom-archives@telecom-digest.org Send a simple, one line note to that automated address for a help file on how to use the automatic retrieval system for archives files. You can get desired files in email. ************************************************************************* * TELECOM Digest is partially funded by a grant from * * Judith Oppenheimer, President of ICB Inc. and purveyor of accurate * * 800 & Dot Com News, Intelligence, Analysis, and Consulting. * * http://ICBTollFree.com, http://1800TheExpert.com * * Views expressed herein should not be construed as representing * * views of Judith Oppenheimer or ICB Inc. * ************************************************************************* ICB Toll Free News. Contact information is not sold, rented or leased. One click a day feeds a person a meal. Go to http://www.thehungersite.com Copyright 2004 ICB, Inc. and TELECOM Digest. All rights reserved. Our attorney is Bill Levant, of Blue Bell, PA. ************************ DIRECTORY ASSISTANCE JUST 65 CENTS ONE OR TWO INQUIRIES CHARGED TO YOUR CREDIT CARD! REAL TIME, UP TO DATE! SPONSORED BY TELECOM DIGEST AND EASY411.COM SIGN UP AT http://www.easy411.com/telecomdigest ! ************************ --------------------------------------------------------------- Finally, the Digest is funded by gifts from generous readers such as yourself who provide funding in amounts deemed appropriate. Your help is important and appreciated. A suggested donation of fifty dollars per year per reader is considered appropriate. See our address above. Please make at least a single donation to cover the cost of processing your name to the mailing list. All opinions expressed herein are deemed to be those of the author. Any organizations listed are for identification purposes only and messages should not be considered any official expression by the organization. End of TELECOM Digest V23 #581 ****************************** From editor@telecom-digest.org Mon Dec 6 18:43:31 2004 Received: (from ptownson@localhost) by massis.lcs.mit.edu (8.11.6p3/8.11.6) id iB6NhVg29885; Mon, 6 Dec 2004 18:43:31 -0500 (EST) Date: Mon, 6 Dec 2004 18:43:31 -0500 (EST) From: editor@telecom-digest.org Message-Id: <200412062343.iB6NhVg29885@massis.lcs.mit.edu> X-Authentication-Warning: massis.lcs.mit.edu: ptownson set sender to editor@telecom-digest.org using -f To: ptownson Approved: patsnewlist Subject: TELECOM Digest V23 #582 TELECOM Digest Mon, 6 Dec 2004 18:43:00 EST Volume 23 : Issue 582 Inside This Issue: Editor: Patrick A. Townson For $999, a Lifetime of Internet Phone Calls (Lisa Minter) Treo 600 Internet Access (sssadler@rogers.com) BellSouth to Upgrade Network (Telecom dailyLead from USTA) Norvergence, was: Kudos to New York Attorney General (Danny Burstein) Re: Another Black Eye For VoIP2 (sripaiboon@gmail.com) Re: GM Auto's OnStar Phone System? (J Kelly) Re: Countering the "Lingo Sucks" Thread (Tony P.) New Telecom Website Feature: Telecom Digest Extra (Patrick Townson) Telecom and VOIP (Voice over Internet Protocol) Digest for the Internet. All contents here are copyrighted by Patrick Townson and the individual writers/correspondents. Articles may be used in other journals or newsgroups, provided the writer's name and the Digest are included in the fair use quote. By using -any name or email address- included herein for -any- reason other than responding to an article herein, you agree to pay a hundred dollars to the recipients of the email. =========================== Addresses herein are not to be added to any mailing list, nor to be sold or given away without explicit written consent. Chain letters, viruses, porn, spam, and miscellaneous junk are definitely unwelcome. We must fight spam for the same reason we fight crime: not because we are naive enough to believe that we will ever stamp it out, but because we do not want the kind of world that results when no one stands against crime. Geoffrey Welsh =========================== See the bottom of this issue for subscription and archive details and the name of our lawyer; other stuff of interest. ---------------------------------------------------------------------- From: Lisa Minter Date: Mon, 06 Dec 2004 11:56:25 -0500 Subject: For $999, a Lifetime of Internet Phone Calls Jack Decker's note: Interesting idea here, but of course the problem is that any sort of "lifetime" plan beg the question -- whose lifetime? That of the customer, or of the company offering the plan? Basically you are gambling that the company will stick around long enough to at least give you a better deal than you would have got by buying service on a per-month basis. On the other hand, this plan could give the company a lot of up-front cash to reinvest in the company, and by the time four or five years are up it just might be that there are no longer significant terminating charges on calls, so the company will be able to keep providing the service. Since I have no crystal ball (and would probably only see the dust on it if I did), I can't tell you what the future will bring for those who sign up for this. http://www.boston.com/business/technology/articles/2004/12/06/for_999_a_lifetime_of_internet_phone_calls/ For $999, a lifetime of Internet phone calls By Peter J. Howe, Globe Staff | December 6, 2004 Making unlimited phone calls for a fixed monthly price has proven to be a key selling point for Internet phone services like Vonage and AT&T CallVantage. But an upstart Dedham company is raising the stakes, offering consumers all the phone calls they want for the rest of their lives. RNK Telecom Inc. is promising subscribers that for a one-time payment of $999 they can make an unlimited number of unbilled calls for their remaining days on Earth. Customers would have to continue to pay another company for a broadband Internet connection, however. RNK plans to begin offering the "Phone for Life" plan today to Massachusetts consumers, through retail partners including Galaxy Internet Services of Newton, Pro-Speed.net of Tyngsborough, and Voip2Save.com of Providence. The same deal will be offered in New Hampshire and Rhode Island later this month and in New York in January, company president Richard N. Koch said. At current rates, compared to the $30-a-month cost of AT&T Corp.'s CallVantage Internet phone service, with the first month free, RNK's offer would not save a consumer money until after 34 months of service. Full story at: http://www.boston.com/business/technology/articles/2004/12/06/for_999_a_lifetime_of_internet_phone_calls/ ------------------------------ From: sssadler@rogers.com Subject: Treo 600 Internet Access Date: 6 Dec 2004 12:27:49 -0800 Organization: http://groups.google.com I have a TREO 600 cell phone with Bell Mobility ... I also have a Rogers high speed internet account ... Neither Bell nor Rogers can explain the server pop 3 settings that I can use to access my a-mail account through the phone ... pop.broadband.rogers.com doesn't work ... pop-rog.mail.yahoo.com doesn't work (suggestion from Bell tech support) ... Is there any one to sync the cell so it gets me Rogers e-mail??? Anyone can help me??? ------------------------------ Date: Mon, 6 Dec 2004 13:32:54 -0500 (EST) From: Telecom dailyLead from USTA Subject: BellSouth to upgrade network Telecom dailyLead from USTA December 6, 2004 http://www.dailylead.com/latestIssue.jsp?i=17913&l=2017006 TODAY'S HEADLINES NEWS OF THE DAY * BellSouth to upgrade network BUSINESS & INDUSTRY WATCH * Telecom Italia set for TIM buyout * Big wireless auction just around the corner * Cisco: CRS-1 sales ahead of projections USTA SPOTLIGHT * USTA Webinar: LNP Porting Requirements -- Thursday, Dec. 9, 1:00 p.m. EDT EMERGING TECHNOLOGIES * Online, phone worlds meet in growing marketing technique REGULATORY & LEGISLATIVE * Supreme Court to hear cable broadband case * Report: Musicians embrace Internet, oppose suits against file-sharers * Telecom Act may be outdated Follow the link below to read quick summaries of these stories and others. http://www.dailylead.com/latestIssue.jsp?i=17913&l=2017006 Legal and Privacy information at http://www.dailylead.com/about/privacy_legal.jsp SmartBrief, Inc. 1100 H ST NW, Suite 1000 Washington, DC 20005 ------------------------------ From: Danny Burstein Subject: Norvergence, was: Kudos to New York Attorney General Date: Mon, 6 Dec 2004 20:15:52 UTC Organization: PANIX Public Access Internet and UNIX, NYC In David O. Rodriguez writes: > I just read that New York Attorney General Eliot Spitzer negotiated > with GE Capital to eliminate the lease payments for the NorVergence > MATRIX. GE Capital is even going to refund money. Hopefully all other > finacial institutions and all other states involved will follow this > example. Hey, you beat me to it! No fair ... Spitzer's press release is at: http://www.nydailynews.com/news/ideas_opinions/story/259192p-222020c.html BTW, GE Capital is the actual "real company" (loosely defined) behind many other names, so it's quite possible that "East Cupcake Bar and Loan" (and many others ...) is really one of their offshoots. Knowledge may be power, but communications is the key dannyb@panix.com [to foil spammers, my address has been double rot-13 encoded] ------------------------------ From: sripaiboon@gmail.com Subject: Re: Another Black Eye For VoIP2 Date: 6 Dec 2004 11:22:35 -0800 Organization: http://groups.google.com I used Voip2.net for two months, ten days. Suddenly they've changed their plan without inform and still charge me the same amount. A lot of tricky thing in their term of service like 49.95 smallworld plan. They quote unlimited international call but they are restriction that you can not make a call more than usually resident call, and they didn't tell how many minutes? If you want to cancel you have to pay a lot of money to them. A lot of bad servicea from them. Be careful! Lisa Minter wrote: > Jack Decker comment: Anyone who is even thinking about doing business > with VoIP2 really should first read the numerous comments about them > in the BroadbandReports.com VoIP forum. > http://www.broadbandreports.com/shownews/56260 > Read Your Fine Print > Marketing Lingo in the modern age. > One user in our VoIP forum > > claims they were slammed with a five-hundred dollar cancellation fee > by upstart provider VoIP2 after taking their > "Money Back Guarantee" a little too literally. Their terms of service > stipulate if you cancel in writing > within the allotted time frame you'll get your money back, sans "the > charges for completed calls at $0.03 per minute for United States > calls related to an Unlimited plan and the actual billed charge for > International calls" (of which we're guessing he made a few). This is > 2004: unlimited means limited and "Money Back Guarantees" mean "Some > of your money back, maybe." > Full article plus reader comments at > http://www.broadbandreports.com/shownews/56260 > Another related thread at: > http://www.broadbandreports.com/forum/remark,11640174~mode=flat ------------------------------ From: J Kelly Subject: Re: GM Auto's OnStar Phone System? Date: Mon, 06 Dec 2004 13:59:55 -0600 Organization: http://newsguy.com Reply-To: jkelly@newsguy.com On Sat, 04 Dec 2004 14:20:28 GMT, Jim Burks wrote: > Al Dykes wrote in message > news:telecom23.577.6@telecom-digest.org: >> Whenever I hear an advert for a GM car that features the built-in >> phone system I wonder what kind of cell service they use. Someone >> here proably knows. >> ISTM that it's got to be analog, for the widest possible coverage, but >> I thought this was being phased sooner rather than later. > OnStar uses Verizon Wireless for connectivity. Original version was > analog only. Current product uses analog/CDMA. It may also use other carriers, depending on where you live. My parents both have vehicles with OnStar registered to the same address. Each vehicle has a number assigned to a different carrier, both of which are smallish rural carriers. ------------------------------ From: Tony P. Subject: Re: Countering the "Lingo Sucks" Thread Organization: ATCC Date: Mon, 6 Dec 2004 17:52:17 -0500 In article , tkoppel@adelphia.net says: > I'm a little bothered by the recent Lingo Sucks thread that has been > rolling through the TD the last couple of days. Let's get serious -- > the inability to successfully port a Verizon phone number to Lingo is > *not* Lingo's fault -- it is clearly and incontestibly Verizon's. > (Among other postings, see mine of early October about trying to get > Verizon to do their job.) My complaint got elevated to the Verizon President's office. Verizon is scared shitless that their incompetence has lost them yet another customer who used to pay over $100 a month. However I did find out today that my LNP move not being completed yet is due to Paetec's dropping the ball. Imagine my surprise. Paetec has since been informed to get on the ball. But then, it's December 6th and I seriously doubt I'll see anything this week. So the 13th or 14th it will be. Total mental masturbation exercise. ------------------------------ From: TELECOM Digest Editor Subject: New Website Feature: Telecom Digest Extra Date: Mon, 6 Dec 2004 18:00:00 EST An addition to our web site is Telecom Digest (or TD) Extra. This is a series of telecom and networking news items received from our news wire for the most part not included in the regular Digest each day. This is a collection of a dozen or more items which arrive each day and are automatically updated throughout the day (on a 24 hour cycle) for you to read. Each time you login to our web site you will probably find one or two new items in the telecom news section. To check it out, go to http://telecom-digest.org/td-extra (for direct entry) or you can go through our main front page, or if you prefer, when you read our http://telecom-digest.org/latest-issue.html on line you will see a short cut there to td-extra as well. I hope you enjoy this additional collection of always changing telecom news headlines from our news wire. PAT ------------------------------ TELECOM Digest is an electronic journal devoted mostly but not exclusively to telecommunications topics. It is circulated anywhere there is email, in addition to various telecom forums on a variety of networks such as Compuserve and America On Line, Yahoo Groups, and other forums. It is also gatewayed to Usenet where it appears as the moderated newsgroup 'comp.dcom.telecom'. TELECOM Digest is a not-for-profit, mostly non-commercial educational service offered to the Internet by Patrick Townson. All the contents of the Digest are compilation-copyrighted. You may reprint articles in some other media on an occasional basis, but please attribute my work and that of the original author. Contact information: Patrick Townson/TELECOM Digest Post Office Box 50 Independence, KS 67301 Phone: 620-402-0134 Fax 1: 775-255-9970 Fax 2: 530-309-7234 Fax 3: 208-692-5145 Email: editor@telecom-digest.org Subscribe: telecom-subscribe@telecom-digest.org Unsubscribe:telecom-unsubscribe@telecom-digest.org This Digest is the oldest continuing e-journal about telecomm- unications on the Internet, having been founded in August, 1981 and published continuously since then. Our archives are available for your review/research. We believe we are the oldest e-zine/mailing list on the internet in any category! URL information: http://telecom-digest.org Anonymous FTP: mirror.lcs.mit.edu/telecom-archives/archives/ (or use our mirror site: ftp.epix.net/pub/telecom-archives) Email <==> FTP: telecom-archives@telecom-digest.org Send a simple, one line note to that automated address for a help file on how to use the automatic retrieval system for archives files. You can get desired files in email. ************************************************************************* * TELECOM Digest is partially funded by a grant from * * Judith Oppenheimer, President of ICB Inc. and purveyor of accurate * * 800 & Dot Com News, Intelligence, Analysis, and Consulting. * * http://ICBTollFree.com, http://1800TheExpert.com * * Views expressed herein should not be construed as representing * * views of Judith Oppenheimer or ICB Inc. * ************************************************************************* ICB Toll Free News. Contact information is not sold, rented or leased. One click a day feeds a person a meal. Go to http://www.thehungersite.com Copyright 2004 ICB, Inc. and TELECOM Digest. All rights reserved. Our attorney is Bill Levant, of Blue Bell, PA. ************************ DIRECTORY ASSISTANCE JUST 65 CENTS ONE OR TWO INQUIRIES CHARGED TO YOUR CREDIT CARD! REAL TIME, UP TO DATE! SPONSORED BY TELECOM DIGEST AND EASY411.COM SIGN UP AT http://www.easy411.com/telecomdigest ! ************************ --------------------------------------------------------------- Finally, the Digest is funded by gifts from generous readers such as yourself who provide funding in amounts deemed appropriate. Your help is important and appreciated. A suggested donation of fifty dollars per year per reader is considered appropriate. See our address above. Please make at least a single donation to cover the cost of processing your name to the mailing list. All opinions expressed herein are deemed to be those of the author. Any organizations listed are for identification purposes only and messages should not be considered any official expression by the organization. End of TELECOM Digest V23 #582 ****************************** From editor@telecom-digest.org Tue Dec 7 02:35:03 2004 Received: (from ptownson@localhost) by massis.lcs.mit.edu (8.11.6p3/8.11.6) id iB77Z2p04107; Tue, 7 Dec 2004 02:35:03 -0500 (EST) Date: Tue, 7 Dec 2004 02:35:03 -0500 (EST) From: editor@telecom-digest.org Message-Id: <200412070735.iB77Z2p04107@massis.lcs.mit.edu> X-Authentication-Warning: massis.lcs.mit.edu: ptownson set sender to editor@telecom-digest.org using -f To: ptownson Approved: patsnewlist Subject: TELECOM Digest V23 #583 TELECOM Digest Tue, 7 Dec 2004 02:33:00 EST Volume 23 : Issue 583 Inside This Issue: Editor: Patrick A. Townson Mass. Poised to be First With Electronic Medical Records (Monty Solomon) Boston Techies Envision TV's On-Demand Future (Monty Solomon) Pew Internet Report on Artists and the Internet (Monty Solomon) FTC Gets Settlement With Yet Another Dial-Sleazer (Danny Burstein) Phone Works But Extensions Don't Ring (Kevin) Re: Norvergence, was: Kudos to New York Attorney General (John Levine) Re: Norvergence, was: Kudos to New York Attorney General (Dan Burstein) Re: Lingo Voip SUCKS! (keeldragger) Re: Countering the "Lingo Sucks" Thread (Dan Lanciani) For $999, a Lifetime of Internet Phone Calls (Monty Solomon) Re: For $999, a Lifetime of Internet Phone Calls (Tim Keating) Telecom and VOIP (Voice over Internet Protocol) Digest for the Internet. All contents here are copyrighted by Patrick Townson and the individual writers/correspondents. Articles may be used in other journals or newsgroups, provided the writer's name and the Digest are included in the fair use quote. By using -any name or email address- included herein for -any- reason other than responding to an article herein, you agree to pay a hundred dollars to the recipients of the email. =========================== Addresses herein are not to be added to any mailing list, nor to be sold or given away without explicit written consent. Chain letters, viruses, porn, spam, and miscellaneous junk are definitely unwelcome. We must fight spam for the same reason we fight crime: not because we are naive enough to believe that we will ever stamp it out, but because we do not want the kind of world that results when no one stands against crime. Geoffrey Welsh =========================== See the bottom of this issue for subscription and archive details and the name of our lawyer; other stuff of interest. ---------------------------------------------------------------------- Date: Mon, 6 Dec 2004 22:57:35 -0500 From: Monty Solomon Subject: Mass. Poised to Be First State With Electronic Medical Records By Jennifer Peter, Associated Press Writer BOSTON -- Within five years, physicians could be able to access patients' records from any hospital or doctors' office in the state under a new "eHealth" initiative financed with an infusion of $50 million from Blue Cross Blue Shield of Massachusetts. The project, which will begin as a pilot program in three communities, could make Massachusetts the first in the nation to have a statewide electronic medical record system, which would allow doctors to easily see what kind of care a patient has received from other physicians, avoid duplications, and prevent medical errors. http://www.boston.com/news/local/massachusetts/articles/2004/12/06/mass_poised_to_become_first_state_with_electronic_medical_records/ ------------------------------ Date: Mon, 6 Dec 2004 23:15:56 -0500 From: Monty Solomon Subject: Boston Techies Envision TV's On-demand Future @LARGE By Scott Kirsner At the end of a boisterous dinner, after several glasses of good red wine, technology entrepreneur John Landry pulled out his iPaq hand-held and beckoned me over to his side of the table. "You'll think this is cool," he said. "We call it Tiny TiVo ." Suddenly, his iPaq began playing the opening segment of the "Today" show, recorded that morning. For kicks, Landry had tweaked software made by his company, Adesso Systems of Boston, so that it would transfer television shows recorded on his home PC to his hand-held, allowing him to watch them whenever and wherever he wanted. Illegal? Possibly. But cool? Definitely. Boston isn't typically thought of as a hub of the entertainment industry. But Boston techies are envisioning the future of television, from nifty tricks like Tiny TiVo to massive video-on-demand systems like those sold by Maynard's SeaChange International and deployed by Comcast . The next generation of TV would hardly be recognizable to Philo Farnsworth, the farm boy who invented the medium. You'll choose exactly which shows you want to watch, and watch them on your schedule, on whatever device is most convenient. You'll even be able to "edit" a show yourself, choosing to watch only the scoring drives from Sunday's Patriots game, or just the stories from the local news that relate to your neighborhood. The ads you see will be tightly targeted, pitching Jordan's Furniture and Brinks Home Security if you've just bought a new house, for instance. http://www.boston.com/business/technology/articles/2004/12/06/boston_techies_envision_tvs_on_demand_future/ ------------------------------ Date: Tue, 7 Dec 2004 00:42:42 -0500 From: Monty Solomon Subject: Pew Internet Report on Artists & the Internet http://www.pewinternet.org/report_display.asp?r=142 Artists, Musicians and the Internet: They have embraced the internet as a tool that helps them create, promote, and sell their work. However, they are divided about the impact and importance of free file-sharing and other copyright issues. 12/5/2004 Mary Madden The first large-scale surveys of the internet's impact on artists and musicians reveal that they are embracing the Web as a tool to improve how they make, market, and sell their creative works. They eagerly welcome new opportunities that are provided by digital technology and the internet. At the same time, they believe that unauthorized online file sharing is wrong and that current copyright laws are appropriate, though there are some major divisions among them about what constitutes appropriate copying and sharing of digital files. Their overall judgment is that unauthorized online file-sharing does not pose a major threat to creative industries: Two-thirds of artists say peer-to-peer file sharing poses a minor threat or no threat at all to them. Across the board, among those who are both successful and struggling, the artists and musicians we surveyed are more likely to say that the internet has made it possible for them to make more money from their art than they are to say it has made it harder to protect their work from piracy or unlawful use. http://www.pewinternet.org/report_display.asp?r=142 http://www.pewinternet.org/PPF/r/94/press_release.asp http://www.pewinternet.org/pdfs/PIP_Artists.Musicians_Report.pdf ------------------------------ From: Danny Burstein Subject: FTC Gets Settlement With Yet Another Dial-Sleazer Date: Mon, 6 Dec 2004 19:44:28 -0500 Organization: PANIX Public Access Internet and UNIX, NYC (as is typical, the only "punishment" is a return of _some_ of the cash and a promise to behave in the future. And there's no extension to the various telcos who facilitated this scam. Better than nothing, though.) "Alyon Technologies, Inc. will drop its claim to approximately $17 million in consumer bills to settle Federal Trade Commission charges that it engaged in unauthorized billing and collection for adult videotext services supposedly accessed on the Internet by hundreds of thousands of consumers. Another $22 million in bills may be forgiven if consumers challenge their charges. "According to the FTC, the defendants downloaded a modem-dialing program onto consumers computers, allegedly after consumers clicked on a button to agree to the terms and conditions for such a download. The dialing program then disconnected consumers from their own Internet service providers and reconnected them to the defendants network. [ snippety snip, rest at: http://www.ftc.gov/opa/2004/12/alyonsettlement.htm _____________________________________________________ Knowledge may be power, but communications is the key dannyb@panix.com [to foil spammers, my address has been double rot-13 encoded] ------------------------------ From: kevinliffey@btinternet.com (Kevin) Subject: Phone Works But Extensions Don't Ring Date: 6 Dec 2004 15:49:02 -0800 Organization: http://groups.google.com My telephone and three extensions work fine for outgoing calls -- but ringing is very erratic. The phone farthest from the master socket only begins ringing about six rings after the first socket, or doesn't ring at all. In checking the wiring, I've noticed that our electrician installed 'master socket' plates for the three extensions as well as the true master socket. Could that be the explanation? ------------------------------ Date: 7 Dec 2004 02:24:44 -0000 From: John Levine Subject: Re: Norvergence, was: Kudos to New York Attorney General Organization: I.E.C.C., Trumansburg NY USA > Hey, you beat me to it! No fair ... > Spitzer's press release is at: Oops, the URL you gave was a Daily News story about an old campaign loan. The press release about Norvergence is: http://www.oag.state.ny.us/press/2004/dec/dec6b_04.html The release says at the end that the AG has notified 19 other lenders that he'll be in contact, presumably for a similar settlement. The NY AG only affects customers in New York, but it's hard to see how the lenders could make much of a case to collect elsewhere since all the facts are the same. Regards, John Levine johnl@iecc.com Primary Perpetrator of The Internet for Dummies, Information Superhighwayman wanna-be, http://www.johnlevine.com, Mayor "More Wiener schnitzel, please", said Tom, revealingly. ------------------------------ Date: Mon, 6 Dec 2004 21:30:20 EST From: Danny Burstein Subject: Re: Norvergence, was: Kudos to New York Attorney General > Oops, the URL you gave was a Daily News story about an old campaign > loan. > The press release about Norvergence is: > http://www.oag.state.ny.us/press/2004/dec/dec6b_04.html OOOOUUUUUUCHHHHH. I hate it when I do that. I'll blame it on the computer. yeah, that's it. Feel free to dig into me in a c.d.t correction ... ------------------------------ From: keeldragger Subject: Re: Lingo Voip SUCKS! Date: 6 Dec 2004 17:18:32 -0800 Organization: http://groups.google.com I just went to Lingo and am very happy with the service. I have to agree with you regarding the local number portability. LINGO should be able to tell you up front if they can transfer the number OR refund your money. In my case, I also have Verizon for local service. I checked several other providers (Vonage, ATT, etc.) and none of them said my number was portable. Lingo could never confirm or deny ... they said it depended on my current service provider. I called Verizon and the rep I spoke with said there are no limitations whatsoever from their perspective. Oh, I also emailed Verizon's tech support. Verizon. I received a confirmation of my request and 3 business days later (5 days total) and I have not yet received a reply. LINGO my suck but in my opinion, VERIZON SUCKS WORSE. Any idea why Verizon would charge me $68/mth (including taxes) for local service when I can get more features from Lingo. I'm pretty sure my fees to Verizon don't include customer support because I have found Lingo to be much more responsive (although not terrific). I bit the bullet and said screw it ... I'm going to just give up on porting my number. It's not worth the hassle. But I'm going to keep Lingo. Verizon is fired. Regards. Garth Nospam wrote: > Well let me state that Lingo still SUCKS! > I'm always happy to blame Verizon whenever possible but I think in my > case Primus (Lingo) is being run in very non business friendly way. > Now remember, it took Lingo 40+ days to tell me they could not port > my phone number to their system. > I checked around with other Voip companies and even Verizon's Voip > service. None of them support porting my number including Verizon who > provides me my local service and current number! How long did it take > all the other company's to tell me this? NOT 40 DAYS! About 30 sec > with a built in search function on their web pages!!! > Now tell me Lingo is not scamming people with their $39.90 disconnect > charge. > -Garth ------------------------------ Date: Mon, 6 Dec 2004 22:55:46 -0500 (EST) From: Dan Lanciani Subject: Re: Countering the "Lingo Sucks" Thread tkoppel@adelphia.net (Ted Koppel) wrote: > If you're going to complain about Lingo, at least do it for real reasons: > - still not sending callerID *name* (although they are sending number) > on outgoing calls So what does it mean to send callerID name on outgoing calls? I was under the (mis?)impression that calling name presentation was normally implemented by the terminating switch doing a database dip using the SS7-passed calling number. I heard some talk of an end-to-end version, but I thought it wasn't generally supported. Dan Lanciani ddl@danlan.*com ------------------------------ Date: Mon, 6 Dec 2004 22:35:14 -0500 From: Monty Solomon Subject: For $999, a Lifetime of Internet Phone Calls By Peter J. Howe, Globe Staff | December 6, 2004 Making unlimited phone calls for a fixed monthly price has proven to be a key selling point for Internet phone services like Vonage and AT&T CallVantage. But an upstart Dedham company is raising the stakes, offering consumers all the phone calls they want for the rest of their lives. RNK Telecom Inc. is promising subscribers that for a one-time payment of $999 they can make an unlimited number of unbilled calls for their remaining days on Earth. Customers would have to continue to pay another company for a broadband Internet connection, however. RNK plans to begin offering the "Phone for Life" plan today to Massachusetts consumers, through retail partners including Galaxy Internet Services of Newton, Pro-Speed.net of Tyngsborough, and Voip2Save.com of Providence. The same deal will be offered in New Hampshire and Rhode Island later this month and in New York in January, company president Richard N. Koch said. At current rates, compared to the $30-a-month cost of AT&T Corp.'s CallVantage Internet phone service, with the first month free, RNK's offer would not save a consumer money until after 34 months of service. Likewise, Vonage Holdings Corp.'s "premium unlimited" service would be a better deal than RNK's until about 40 months had passed. Vonage, which charges $25 a month, is the biggest US provider of "voice over Internet protocol" phone service, with over 200,000 subscribers. http://www.boston.com/business/technology/articles/2004/12/06/for_999_a_lifetime_of_internet_phone_calls/ ------------------------------ From: Tim Keating Subject: Re: For $999, a Lifetime of Internet Phone Calls Date: Mon, 06 Dec 2004 21:09:58 -0500 Organization: Posted via Supernews, http://www.supernews.com On Mon, 06 Dec 2004 11:56:25 -0500, Lisa Minter quoted Jack Decker: > Jack Decker's note: Interesting idea here, but of course the problem > is that any sort of "lifetime" plan beg the question -- whose > lifetime? That of the customer, or of the company offering the plan? > Basically you are gambling that the company will stick around long > enough to at least give you a better deal than you would have got by > buying service on a per-month basis. On the other hand, this plan > could give the company a lot of up-front cash to reinvest in the Or they can pull another Novergence style scam. Liberate the cash, in the form of excessive executive compensation. And then file for bankruptcy. Presto, no need to worry above fulling future obligations. > company, and by the time four or five years are up it just might be > that there are no longer significant terminating charges on calls, so > the company will be able to keep providing the service. Since I have > no crystal ball (and would probably only see the dust on it if I did), > I can't tell you what the future will bring for those who sign up for > this. > http://www.boston.com/business/technology/articles/2004/12/06/for_999_a_lifetime_of_internet_phone_calls/ > For $999, a lifetime of Internet phone calls Then kiss your money good by. You're betting that this Startup will still be a viable company in four to five years. Odds are at least to 5 to 1 against. You'll get better odds in Vegas, playing black jack. ------------------------------ TELECOM Digest is an electronic journal devoted mostly but not exclusively to telecommunications topics. It is circulated anywhere there is email, in addition to various telecom forums on a variety of networks such as Compuserve and America On Line, Yahoo Groups, and other forums. It is also gatewayed to Usenet where it appears as the moderated newsgroup 'comp.dcom.telecom'. TELECOM Digest is a not-for-profit, mostly non-commercial educational service offered to the Internet by Patrick Townson. All the contents of the Digest are compilation-copyrighted. You may reprint articles in some other media on an occasional basis, but please attribute my work and that of the original author. Contact information: Patrick Townson/TELECOM Digest Post Office Box 50 Independence, KS 67301 Phone: 620-402-0134 Fax 1: 775-255-9970 Fax 2: 530-309-7234 Fax 3: 208-692-5145 Email: editor@telecom-digest.org Subscribe: telecom-subscribe@telecom-digest.org Unsubscribe:telecom-unsubscribe@telecom-digest.org This Digest is the oldest continuing e-journal about telecomm- unications on the Internet, having been founded in August, 1981 and published continuously since then. Our archives are available for your review/research. We believe we are the oldest e-zine/mailing list on the internet in any category! URL information: http://telecom-digest.org Anonymous FTP: mirror.lcs.mit.edu/telecom-archives/archives/ (or use our mirror site: ftp.epix.net/pub/telecom-archives) Email <==> FTP: telecom-archives@telecom-digest.org Send a simple, one line note to that automated address for a help file on how to use the automatic retrieval system for archives files. You can get desired files in email. ************************************************************************* * TELECOM Digest is partially funded by a grant from * * Judith Oppenheimer, President of ICB Inc. and purveyor of accurate * * 800 & Dot Com News, Intelligence, Analysis, and Consulting. * * http://ICBTollFree.com, http://1800TheExpert.com * * Views expressed herein should not be construed as representing * * views of Judith Oppenheimer or ICB Inc. * ************************************************************************* ICB Toll Free News. Contact information is not sold, rented or leased. One click a day feeds a person a meal. Go to http://www.thehungersite.com Copyright 2004 ICB, Inc. and TELECOM Digest. All rights reserved. Our attorney is Bill Levant, of Blue Bell, PA. ************************ DIRECTORY ASSISTANCE JUST 65 CENTS ONE OR TWO INQUIRIES CHARGED TO YOUR CREDIT CARD! REAL TIME, UP TO DATE! SPONSORED BY TELECOM DIGEST AND EASY411.COM SIGN UP AT http://www.easy411.com/telecomdigest ! ************************ --------------------------------------------------------------- Finally, the Digest is funded by gifts from generous readers such as yourself who provide funding in amounts deemed appropriate. Your help is important and appreciated. A suggested donation of fifty dollars per year per reader is considered appropriate. See our address above. Please make at least a single donation to cover the cost of processing your name to the mailing list. All opinions expressed herein are deemed to be those of the author. Any organizations listed are for identification purposes only and messages should not be considered any official expression by the organization. End of TELECOM Digest V23 #583 ****************************** From editor@telecom-digest.org Tue Dec 7 23:35:25 2004 Received: (from ptownson@localhost) by massis.lcs.mit.edu (8.11.6p3/8.11.6) id iB84ZPG04671; Tue, 7 Dec 2004 23:35:25 -0500 (EST) Date: Tue, 7 Dec 2004 23:35:25 -0500 (EST) From: editor@telecom-digest.org Message-Id: <200412080435.iB84ZPG04671@massis.lcs.mit.edu> X-Authentication-Warning: massis.lcs.mit.edu: ptownson set sender to editor@telecom-digest.org using -f To: ptownson Approved: patsnewlist Subject: TELECOM Digest V23 #584 TELECOM Digest Tue, 7 Dec 2004 23:35:00 EST Volume 23 : Issue 584 Inside This Issue: Editor: Patrick A. Townson How to Call From A to B to C? Please Help (M. Henri) VOIP for Life? (Lisa Minter) Treo650 v Blackberry (Mark) Partner System (t568aort568b@aol.com) DirecTV Group Sells Half Stake in New Satellite Unit (Telecom dailyLead) Western Electric and Al Capone (Jim Haynes) Free Month of Vonage + Gmail Invite (goykhmanster@gmail.com) Connecting VoIP Device to Home Wiring (Ringo Langly) Re: Countering the "Lingo Sucks" Thread (T. Sean Weintz) Re: Countering the "Lingo Sucks" Thread (Hank Karl) Re: Lingo Voip Isn't Really Cheap (John Levine) Re: Dropping SBC For a VOIP Solution-Vonage or Packet8 (Ringo Langly) Re: Phone Works But Extensions Don't Ring (Tony P.) Re: Will Radar Detectors be Regulated Out of Existence? (Bitu) Lycos Pulls Anti-Spam 'Vigilante' Campaign (Lisa Minter) Mix Up; Some Stuff Lost in Processing (TELECOM Digest Editor) Telecom and VOIP (Voice over Internet Protocol) Digest for the Internet. All contents here are copyrighted by Patrick Townson and the individual writers/correspondents. Articles may be used in other journals or newsgroups, provided the writer's name and the Digest are included in the fair use quote. By using -any name or email address- included herein for -any- reason other than responding to an article herein, you agree to pay a hundred dollars to the recipients of the email. =========================== Addresses herein are not to be added to any mailing list, nor to be sold or given away without explicit written consent. Chain letters, viruses, porn, spam, and miscellaneous junk are definitely unwelcome. We must fight spam for the same reason we fight crime: not because we are naive enough to believe that we will ever stamp it out, but because we do not want the kind of world that results when no one stands against crime. Geoffrey Welsh =========================== See the bottom of this issue for subscription and archive details and the name of our lawyer; other stuff of interest. ---------------------------------------------------------------------- From: M. Henri Subject: How to Call from A to B to C? Please Help Date: Wed, 08 Dec 2004 00:13:22 GMT Hi, I'm currently working on a venture possibility in my small town that is an hour away from a major City. Placing call to that major city(town A) is a long distance from my town (town B). But a town in between (town C) is not a long distance for both ends. People would call from town A to town C and reach town B without any additional charge besides the monthly charge from the services of my own company. That software would have to accept 2 set of entry from the clients touch tone phone: first entry would be some unique client code and the second entry would be the 10 digits phone number to town B. From there the call would be made allowing a bridge to be made between the two intended cities. I was wondering if anyone knows what it would require technically to achieve such thing. I don't even know how many incomming line would be required for this project. Hope anyone can help. remove _nospam from the email address to reach me. Marc [TELECOM Digest Editor's Note: I used to do this same thing back about 1973 or so. In central area of Chicago, I had lines with a recorded message 24/7. A friend who lived in Joliet, IL (815) had an unlimited, extended line which included all of 312 plus the Chicago metro area of 815. I got him to put his line on permanent call forwarding to my recorded message in exchange for another line I got him for his own incoming calls. Consequently, the 'toll free' for callers to my recorded message line picked up everyone that was otherwise local to Joliet, Illinois. PAT] ------------------------------ From: Lisa Minter Date: Tue, 07 Dec 2004 19:27:40 -0500 Subject: VOIP for Life? http://www.lightreading.com/document.asp?site=lightreading&doc_id=64171 VOIP for Life? Just when you thought the VOIP price wars could go no further, Dedham, Mass.-based RNKVoIP announced Monday that it will offer a $999 'phone for life,' an unlimited VOIP calling service. RNKVoIP, a division of RNK Telecom is a privately held telecommunications carrier that provides wholesale services for broadband providers, carriers, and retail distributors. The move is not a huge threat to Vonage or any of the other VOIP carriers with nationwide or international reach. But it is significant in that it calls out residential VOIP service for what it really is -- a low margin service differentiated mostly by clever marketing and cutthroat pricing. [The carrier's president and CEO Richard Koch] says that based on residential customer calling averages, RNK's costs to maintain phone-for-life customers are miniscule. "If you stay our customer for ten years, we'll have only spent about $400 of the $999 you paid," he says. Full story at: http://www.lightreading.com/document.asp?site=lightreading&doc_id=64171 ------------------------------ From: Mark Subject: Treo650 v Blackberry Date: 7 Dec 2004 17:45:17 -0800 Organization: http://groups.google.com Has anyone done an investigation as to the specific features and benefits of each of these devices. Ultimately they seem similar in almost every way. One thing that I really don't understand is the email. How does the treo work v the blackberry. I heard rumors that for the treo to work your computer must be on, and it must be forwarding your messages to versamail. Is this true. How does the blackberry work instead? Any information will be greatly appreciated. ------------------------------ From: t568aort568b@aol.com Subject: Partner System Date: 7 Dec 2004 09:05:08 -0800 Organization: http://groups.google.com I am looking for a Avaya Partner system that will handle 4 incoming lines and at least 7 extentions. It also needs to have 4 voicemail boxes. I would like to have 4 display phones. If anyone has a system like this for sale please send me an email at function12 at aol dot com. Thanks, Eric ------------------------------ Date: Tue, 7 Dec 2004 13:02:45 EST From: Telecom dailyLead from USTA Subject: DirecTV Group Sells Half Stake in New Satellite Unit to SkyTerra Telecom dailyLead from USTA December 7, 2004 http://www.dailylead.com/latestIssue.jsp?i=17945&l=2017006 TODAY'S HEADLINES NEWS OF THE DAY * DirecTV Group sells half of stake in new satellite unit to SkyTerra BUSINESS & INDUSTRY WATCH * Virgin eyes China market * Telecoms unconvinced of China's landline potential * Qwest wins 3-year, $10M Denver contract USTA SPOTLIGHT * USTA members urge Congress to help schools, libraries, rural communities EMERGING TECHNOLOGIES * Bill Clinton draws attention to new search engine REGULATORY & LEGISLATIVE * Former Global Crossing executives likely to face SEC fine * Powell urges action on telecom bills Follow the link below to read quick summaries of these stories and others. http://www.dailylead.com/latestIssue.jsp?i=17945&l=2017006 Legal and Privacy information at http://www.dailylead.com/about/privacy_legal.jsp SmartBrief, Inc. 1100 H ST NW, Suite 1000 Washington, DC 20005 ------------------------------ Subject: Western Electric and Al Capone Reply-To: jhaynes@alumni.uark.edu Organization: University of Arkansas Alumni From: haynes@alumni.uark.edu (Jim Haynes) Date: Tue, 07 Dec 2004 17:36:33 GMT I'm currently reading a book, "Manufacturing the Future - a History of Western Electric" by Stephen B. Adams and Orville R. Butler. Al Capone had a couple of casinos across Cicero Avenue from the Western Electric Hawthorne Works. Joseph Juran was a statistics expert in quality control at Western. After spending some time in Capone's establishment after hours, Juran noticed that one roulette wheel operator worked "like a robot", making the operation of his wheel amenable to statistical analysis and prediction. His expertise enabled him to win $100, which at the time was several weeks' pay. (Compare with the much later activities of some college students documented in the book, "Eudaemonic Pie". They used computers in briefcases and radios in their shoes in a successful scheme to predict the behavior of a roulette wheel.) jhhaynes at earthlink dot net ------------------------------ From: goykhmanster@gmail.com Subject: Free Month of Vonage + Gmail Invite Date: 7 Dec 2004 14:41:43 -0800 Organization: http://groups.google.com I am a present Vonage customer for 9 months and I have had nothing but good experience with Vonage. I would be privileged to share my experience with anyone else who would like to sign up for Vonage + refer you for one free month of Vonage service and give you a gmail invite if you don't have a gmail account yet. If you have any questions about Vonage service, VOIP or simply would like a referral link to signup for Vonage service and get one free month -- email me at goykhmanster@gmail.com and I'll be happy to assist you. [TELECOM Digest Editor's Note: Vonage is generally a very good company and quite inexpensive. I had to chat with them today about installing a new Linksys router and TA. The wait on hold was pretty awful, but the senior tech I spoke with (finally) told me they are 'almost constantly' holding training classes for new employees, both technical and customer service-wise. I think he said at the present time there were about two hundred new employees in the training classes. So things may get better. And being located in New Jersey, many of the old Norvergence people have applied there for jobs. PAT] ------------------------------ From: Ringo Langly Subject: Connecting VoIP Device to Home Wiring Date: 7 Dec 2004 11:24:11 -0800 Organization: http://groups.google.com Hi all, I'm a subscriber of Packet8, and on their VoIP box it says not to connect it to the home wiring in my home. I'm assuming they get folks who connect it without unplugging the Ma Bell line and this blows the box. If I disconnect the outside lines (no voltage on phonelines) is there any reason not to connect the VoIP box to make all my phones hot? I only have three phones throughout the house, and I've been told such a box like this should put out enough voltage to carry such a load. Just curious -- Thanks, Ringo [TELECOM Digest Editor's Note: As long as you *disconnect everything* pertaining to Bell first, you should be okay. PAT] ------------------------------ From: T. Sean Weintz Subject: Re: Countering the "Lingo Sucks" Thread Date: Tue, 07 Dec 2004 11:33:38 -0500 Organization: Posted via Supernews, http://www.supernews.com Dan Lanciani wrote: > tkoppel@adelphia.net (Ted Koppel) wrote: >> If you're going to complain about Lingo, at least do it for real reasons: >> - still not sending callerID *name* (although they are sending number) >> on outgoing calls > So what does it mean to send callerID name on outgoing calls? I was > under the (mis?)impression that calling name presentation was normally > implemented by the terminating switch doing a database dip using the > SS7-passed calling number. I heard some talk of an end-to-end > version, but I thought it wasn't generally supported. > Dan Lanciani > ddl@danlan.*com Exactly. If the name on caller ID is not coming up, it's not the sending telco's fault, it's the receiving telco's fault. ------------------------------ From: Hank Karl Subject: Re: Countering the "Lingo Sucks" Thread Date: Tue, 07 Dec 2004 15:32:29 -0500 Organization: NETPLEX Internet Services - http://www.ntplx.net/ On Mon, 6 Dec 2004 22:55:46 -0500 (EST), Dan Lanciani wrote: > tkoppel@adelphia.net (Ted Koppel) wrote: >> If you're going to complain about Lingo, at least do it for real reasons: >> - still not sending callerID *name* (although they are sending number) >> on outgoing calls > So what does it mean to send callerID name on outgoing calls? I was > under the (mis?)impression that calling name presentation was normally > implemented by the terminating switch doing a database dip using the > SS7-passed calling number. I heard some talk of an end-to-end > version, but I thought it wasn't generally supported. There is a way to send end-to-end caller ID Name (on NI-x PRI as well as SS7). As far as I know, its supported, and is starting to be used, but its not used as much as database dips. > Dan Lanciani > ddl@danlan.*com ------------------------------ Date: 7 Dec 2004 15:18:06 -0000 From: John Levine Subject: Re: Lingo Voip isn't really cheap Organization: I.E.C.C., Trumansburg NY USA > LINGO may suck but in my opinion, VERIZON SUCKS WORSE. Any idea why > Verizon would charge me $68/mth (including taxes) for local service > when I can get more features from Lingo. Probably because Lingo only works if you already have a $40/mo broadband connection. I don't understand why people think that something they pay for every month is "free". I have a Vonage phone and like it OK, but I'm under no illusion that Vonage+broadband is cheaper than POTS. Regards, John Levine johnl@iecc.com Primary Perpetrator of The Internet for Dummies Information Superhighwayman wanna-be, http://www.johnlevine.com, Mayor "I shook hands with Senators Dole and Inouye," said Tom, disarmingly. [TELECOM Digest Editor's Note: What you say is true if the only purpose of your broadband line is to handle the phone. But you use the internet line for other things do you not? For example, surfing the web, etc. You cannot allocate the entire broadband cost to Vonage (or your VOIP carrier). PAT] ------------------------------ From: Ringo Langly Subject: Re: Dropping SBC For a VoIP Solution -- Vonage or Packet8 ?? Date: 7 Dec 2004 11:20:21 -0800 Organization: http://groups.google.com Hi ... it might be the Google Groups screwing-up, not sure but I did post a review last week yet it's not showing-up in the thread. Either way here's another quick review after using the phone for a week. Setting-up the Packet8 VoIP box was cake, and it was ready to go after maybe 10 minutes. My first delimma was I had to enable DHCP on my router, which I generally keep turned off. After checking online there is no way to assign a static IP to the VoIP device they sent me. Anyway, my first call went well, but there is a noticeable delay when calling a landline -- and the more traffic going over your broadband the more the delay. My roommate was running Bittorrent downloads, and it wasn't until after I disconnected her computer that the delay was low enough to actually carry on a conversation. But with the broadband line opened-up (no downloads) it worked great! The sound quality was excellent and though the delay was maybe 1/4-1/2 second at times it worked well. I even called the technical support, which I got right through in like 2 rings, but they couldn't do anything for the delay. I had update the firmware in the box before calling them too. One feature I tried that didn't work well was the call forwarding. I forwarded the line to my work number, called my house, and within a couple of rings my work phone rang. The delay was (no kidding) 2-3 seconds. Total pipe-organ effect, which makes this feature useless for me. But all and all it's good enough for what you pay -- which is about $25/month. I'm paying $15 more then that for SBC, which doesn't work when it rains due to a bad buried line they won't fix. Plus the unlimited L/D is nice! Caller ID, callwaiting, etc all work good too -- other then the person's name doesn't come over -- just the phone number on caller ID. So hope that helps someone. I might still try Vonage when they are in my area, but for now Packet8 works good enough for me. If I can get my roommate to limit her Bittorrent downloads I'll be pulling the plug on SBC. Take care, and I'll post anything new as it comes up. Ringo ------------------------------ From: Tony P. Subject: Re: Phone Works But Extensions Don't Ring Organization: ATCC Date: Tue, 7 Dec 2004 17:35:13 -0500 In article , kevinliffey@btinternet.com says: > My telephone and three extensions work fine for outgoing calls -- but > ringing is very erratic. The phone farthest from the master socket > only begins ringing about six rings after the first socket, or doesn't > ring at all. In checking the wiring, I've noticed that our electrician > installed 'master socket' plates for the three extensions as well as > the true master socket. Could that be the explanation? Corrosion is your problem. Somewhere along the line you've got a bad connection and it takes a lot of pushes to get the electrons to jump through that crap. ------------------------------ From: Bitu Subject: Re: Will Radar Detectors be Regulated Out of Existence? Date: 7 Dec 2004 16:18:52 -0800 Organization: http://groups.google.com RADAR DETECTORS WILL BE BANNED SOONER THAN WE WOULD LIKE. Anyways it does not matter. Radar detectors do not protect you against speed cameras, red light cameras or automated traffic enforcement equipment. Police officer operated speed traps are being replaced by cameras at an alarming rate. If is as advertised this product called PHOTO BLOCKER SPRAY is our salvation. They claim that it was tested by the media on their website www.phantomplate.com On the videos it shows the police saying that it really works by making your license plate invisible to traffic cameras. Can anybody tell me if this is true? www.photoblocker.com please let me know what you think. [TELECOM Digest Editor's Note: We talked about this very subject here in the Digest a couple months ago. Perhaps some of the partipants in that conversation will tell you what our group consensus was regards the images the police use. PAT] ------------------------------ Date: Tue, 7 Dec 2004 12:14:59 EST From: Lisa Minter Subject: Lycos Pulls Anti-Spam 'Vigilante' Campaign Just days after Lycos Europe's launch of an anti-spam DDoS tool raised eyebrows in the security space, the company appears to have scrapped the campaign. Early last week, the company released a downloadable screensaver programmed to launch distributed denial-of-service attacks against known spam sites, but the move sparked a shooting war with spammers and attracted condemnation from security researchers. On Friday, Lycos Europe gave up the ghost, posting a "Stay Tuned" note on the MakeLoveNotSpam.com Web site it was using to distribute the screensaver. The Lycos Europe home page, which heavily promoted the screensaver all week, was also scrubbed clean of any references to the screensaver. Company officials did not respond to requests for comment, but security experts were not mincing words. "I find the anti-spam downloadable DDoS tool to be without a doubt irresponsible, possibly illegal, sets a really bad precedent, gives the wrong impression to users, and possibly the dumbest thing I have heard of this week," said Adrien de Beaupre, an incident handler with the SANS Internet Storm Center (ISC). "I can summarize my thoughts into a single word. Dumb. With a capital 'D,'" de Beaupre told eWEEK.com. Dan Goldberg, a senior security analyst with MADJiC Consulting Inc., described the Lycos Europe move as "vigilantism" and said the use of questionable tactics to deal with a security risk created more problems that it solved. "In this case, it only causes traffic saturation. It's a noble gesture to fight back against spammers, but when you try to take down a spam site, a lot of innocent people get caught in the crossfire. As a big company, Lycos has to be more responsible than that," Goldberg said. Evidence of a shooting war in cyberspace was uncovered by anti-virus vendor F-Secure. The company reported that one of the spam sites under attack by the Lycos screensaver simply added a Meta Refresh tag that redirected all incoming traffic back to Lycos. "As an end result, depending on how the Lycos client works, the screen savers downloaded from MakeLoveNotSpam.com might be attacking the download site itself," F-Secure said in a notice. Although the Lycos site is no longer offering the screensaver, MADJiC Consulting's Goldberg says it's likely the DDoS attacks against the spammers will continue for some time. "The software is out there. People have downloaded it and shared it with their friends and family. It's being used and will continue to be used," he said. *** FAIR USE NOTICE. This message contains copyrighted material the use of which has not been specifically authorized by the copyright owner. This Internet discussion group is making it available without profit to group members who have expressed a prior interest in receiving the included information in their efforts to advance the understanding of literary, educational, political, and economic issues, for non-profit research and educational purposes only. I believe that this constitutes a 'fair use' of the copyrighted material as provided for in section 107 of the U.S. Copyright Law. If you wish to use this copyrighted material for purposes of your own that go beyond 'fair use,' you must obtain permission from the copyright owner, in this instance Reuters News Service. For more information go to: http://www.law.cornell.edu/uscode/17/107.shtml ------------------------------ From: TELECOM Digest Editor Subject: Mix up; Some Stuff Lost in Processing Date: Tue, 07 Dec 2004 23:00:00 EST Tuesday was not a good day here. First off, massis crashed for some reason; I had to get Noah M. to go in the machine room and reset it. Then, once massis was restartd, a few pieces of email got mangled and lost, through no fault of MIT. Just my bad nerves, I guess. So if you sent email here between 2 AM Eastern and noon Eastern on Tuesday and it was not printed here, then it is one of the pieces which got lost, sorry. Please resubmit it. Then Vonage sent me a new Linksys TA to replace the Motorola TA I was using. Because of my relatively complex wiring it was not an easy swap out. I had to lay on my back on the floor under the desk, and untangle a bunch of unmarked cables. Between my NetGear wireless router, my hub and the new Linksys TA I spent a couple hours getting it all put together. Then, one of the ethernet cables turned out to be shorted somehow. Not a fun day, to be sure. If you sent a message sometime Tuesday and it did not get in this issue, please resubmit it with my apologies. Also, remember to check out our extended news section on our web site. It is located at http://telecom-digest.org/td-extra with a lot of additional telecom/computer/internet news from our wire service. PAT ------------------------------ TELECOM Digest is an electronic journal devoted mostly but not exclusively to telecommunications topics. It is circulated anywhere there is email, in addition to various telecom forums on a variety of networks such as Compuserve and America On Line, Yahoo Groups, and other forums. It is also gatewayed to Usenet where it appears as the moderated newsgroup 'comp.dcom.telecom'. TELECOM Digest is a not-for-profit, mostly non-commercial educational service offered to the Internet by Patrick Townson. All the contents of the Digest are compilation-copyrighted. You may reprint articles in some other media on an occasional basis, but please attribute my work and that of the original author. Contact information: Patrick Townson/TELECOM Digest Post Office Box 50 Independence, KS 67301 Phone: 620-402-0134 Fax 1: 775-255-9970 Fax 2: 530-309-7234 Fax 3: 208-692-5145 Email: editor@telecom-digest.org Subscribe: telecom-subscribe@telecom-digest.org Unsubscribe:telecom-unsubscribe@telecom-digest.org This Digest is the oldest continuing e-journal about telecomm- unications on the Internet, having been founded in August, 1981 and published continuously since then. Our archives are available for your review/research. We believe we are the oldest e-zine/mailing list on the internet in any category! URL information: http://telecom-digest.org Anonymous FTP: mirror.lcs.mit.edu/telecom-archives/archives/ (or use our mirror site: ftp.epix.net/pub/telecom-archives) Email <==> FTP: telecom-archives@telecom-digest.org Send a simple, one line note to that automated address for a help file on how to use the automatic retrieval system for archives files. You can get desired files in email. ************************************************************************* * TELECOM Digest is partially funded by a grant from * * Judith Oppenheimer, President of ICB Inc. and purveyor of accurate * * 800 & Dot Com News, Intelligence, Analysis, and Consulting. * * http://ICBTollFree.com, http://1800TheExpert.com * * Views expressed herein should not be construed as representing * * views of Judith Oppenheimer or ICB Inc. * ************************************************************************* ICB Toll Free News. Contact information is not sold, rented or leased. One click a day feeds a person a meal. Go to http://www.thehungersite.com Copyright 2004 ICB, Inc. and TELECOM Digest. All rights reserved. Our attorney is Bill Levant, of Blue Bell, PA. ************************ DIRECTORY ASSISTANCE JUST 65 CENTS ONE OR TWO INQUIRIES CHARGED TO YOUR CREDIT CARD! REAL TIME, UP TO DATE! SPONSORED BY TELECOM DIGEST AND EASY411.COM SIGN UP AT http://www.easy411.com/telecomdigest ! ************************ --------------------------------------------------------------- Finally, the Digest is funded by gifts from generous readers such as yourself who provide funding in amounts deemed appropriate. Your help is important and appreciated. A suggested donation of fifty dollars per year per reader is considered appropriate. See our address above. Please make at least a single donation to cover the cost of processing your name to the mailing list. All opinions expressed herein are deemed to be those of the author. Any organizations listed are for identification purposes only and messages should not be considered any official expression by the organization. End of TELECOM Digest V23 #584 ****************************** From editor@telecom-digest.org Wed Dec 8 13:54:17 2004 Received: (from ptownson@localhost) by massis.lcs.mit.edu (8.11.6p3/8.11.6) id iB8IsGo12338; Wed, 8 Dec 2004 13:54:17 -0500 (EST) Date: Wed, 8 Dec 2004 13:54:17 -0500 (EST) From: editor@telecom-digest.org Message-Id: <200412081854.iB8IsGo12338@massis.lcs.mit.edu> X-Authentication-Warning: massis.lcs.mit.edu: ptownson set sender to editor@telecom-digest.org using -f To: ptownson Approved: patsnewlist Subject: TELECOM Digest V23 #585 TELECOM Digest Wed, 8 Dec 2004 13:54:00 EST Volume 23 : Issue 585 Inside This Issue: Editor: Patrick A. Townson Digital PhishNet (Monty Solomon) Cingular Cell Sites in Shopping Malls (Monty Solomon) NMS vs. Aculab (Danny Chan) FCC Head Urges Congress to Free Up E-Rate Funds (Lisa Minter) Experts Push for More Computer Security Efforts (Lisa Minter) WTB: Rackmount Firewall System ([e]num) Re: Connecting VoIP Device to Home Wiring (Ringo Langly) Re: Connecting VoIP Device to Home Wiring (William Warren) Re: Connecting VoIP Device to Home Wiring (Rick Merrill) Re: How to Call from A to B to C? Please Help (Carl Navarro) Re: Lingo Voip Isn't Really Cheap (DevilsPGD) Re: R2 Signalling (William Moss) Re: Western Electric and Al Capone (Ernie B.) Re: For $999, a Lifetime of Internet Phone Calls (Scott Dorsey) CallerID Name was Re: Countering the "Lingo Sucks" Thread (No Spam) Re: Dropping SBC For a VoIP Solution -- Vonage or Packet8 (Rick Merrill) Re: Will Radar Detectors be Regulated Out of Existence? (Rick Merrill) Re: Lycos Pulls Anti-Spam 'Vigilante' Campaign (Rick Merrill) Telecom and VOIP (Voice over Internet Protocol) Digest for the Internet. All contents here are copyrighted by Patrick Townson and the individual writers/correspondents. Articles may be used in other journals or newsgroups, provided the writer's name and the Digest are included in the fair use quote. By using -any name or email address- included herein for -any- reason other than responding to an article herein, you agree to pay a hundred dollars to the recipients of the email. =========================== Addresses herein are not to be added to any mailing list, nor to be sold or given away without explicit written consent. Chain letters, viruses, porn, spam, and miscellaneous junk are definitely unwelcome. We must fight spam for the same reason we fight crime: not because we are naive enough to believe that we will ever stamp it out, but because we do not want the kind of world that results when no one stands against crime. Geoffrey Welsh =========================== See the bottom of this issue for subscription and archive details and the name of our lawyer; other stuff of interest. ---------------------------------------------------------------------- Date: Wed, 8 Dec 2004 09:53:16 -0500 From: Monty Solomon Subject: Digital PhishNet Industry, Law Enforcement Team To Launch Digital PhishNet - Dec 8, 2004 09:01 AM (PR Newswire) International Public-Private Initiative To Expedite Arrests, Convictions Against 'Phishers' REDMOND, Wash., Dec. 8 /PRNewswire-FirstCall/ -- Representatives from a number of industries and international law enforcement agencies today announced the establishment of Digital PhishNet, a collaborative enforcement operation that unites industry leaders in technology, banking, financial services and online auctioneering with law enforcement to tackle "phishing," a destructive and growing form of online identity theft. Digital PhishNet establishes a single, unified line of communication between industry and law enforcement, so critical data to fight phishing can be compiled and provided to law enforcement in real time. Phishing is the particularly harmful and deceptive emerging online threat that involves directing consumers to phony Web sites, usually through forged or "spoofed" spam e-mails, to input personal financial information such as credit card numbers and passcodes. While other industry groups have focused on identifying phishing Web sites and sharing best practices and case information, Digital PhishNet is the first group of its kind to focus on aiding criminal law enforcement and assisting in apprehending and prosecuting those responsible for committing crimes against consumers through phishing. Digital PhishNet brings together industry leaders from nine of the top 10 U.S. banks and financial services providers, four of the top five Internet service providers and five digital commerce and technology companies, and works with top federal and international law enforcement agencies. Developing supporters of Digital PhishNet include America Online Inc., Digital River Inc., EarthLink Inc., Lycos Inc., Microsoft Corp., Network Solutions, VeriSign Inc., the Federal Bureau of Investigation (FBI), the Federal Trade Commission (FTC), the U.S. Secret Service (USSS) and the U.S. Postal Inspection Service (USPIS). More information can be found at http://www.digitalphishnet.org/ . - http://finance.lycos.com/home/news/story.asp?story=45490058 ------------------------------ Date: Wed, 8 Dec 2004 09:59:41 -0500 From: Monty Solomon Subject: Cingular Cell Sites in Shopping Malls Cingular 'Raises the Bar' With Greater Coverage in Shopping Malls Construction program enhances ability to make calls in mall areas ST. LOUIS, Dec. 7 /PRNewswire/ -- Cingular Wireless, the nation's largest wireless provider, is putting the finishing touches on an aggressive plan to help shoppers stay in touch this holiday season -- and beyond -- even in shopping malls. Cingular is using a system of unobtrusive cell sites located within mall buildings linked to small antennas no larger than smoke detectors located above ceiling tiles to distribute the wireless signal throughout the mall. The result is better signal strength and the ability of more customers to use their Cingular wireless phones. The build-out program is part of an announced $58 million construction program for 2004, which has added more than 200 new cell sites in Missouri and Kansas. Below is a list of the malls that have benefited from increased coverage: * St. Louis -- Four malls in St. Louis are benefiting from the increased shopping mall coverage: Chesterfield, Mid-Rivers, South County and West County. * Springfield -- Battlefield Mall and Bass Pro Shop. * Kansas City -- Independence Mall. * Wichita, KS -- Towne West Mall. - http://finance.lycos.com/home/news/story.asp?story=45479780 ------------------------------ From: Danny Chan Subject: NMS vs. Aculab Date: Thu, 9 Dec 2004 00:50:13 +0800 Organization: Pacific Supernet Limited Can anyone tell me which one is better? I am going to buy a E1/T1 digital truck / PSTN telephony card for my school project; however I am new to each of these. Your help appreciated. Danny [TELECOM Digest Editor's Note: Danny, if you would please tell us a little about your school project, perhaps some of the guys here will be able to tell you about using these devices. PAT] ------------------------------ Date: Tue, 7 Dec 2004 12:21:55 EST From: Lisa Minter Subject: FCC Head Urges Congress to Free Up E-Rate Funds Federal Communications Commission Chairman Michael Powell urged Congress to approve legislation easing accounting rules that forced the agency to freeze funds from the so-called E-Rate program earlier this year. "I hope that Congress is able to pass this legislation before adjourning," Powell said in a statement. The E-rate program, administered by the Universal Service Administrative Co. (USAC), is used to subsidize Internet and other communications in schools, as well as rural health care programs. It is funded by companies that offer long-distance telephone service, like AT&T Corp. and Verizon Communications which typically pass on those charges to customers. Without the accounting changes, Powell said, the agency could be forced to seek more money from carriers to raise fees for the program. In August the USAC was forced to freeze hundreds of millions of dollars in funds for the E-rate program in order to comply with accounting standards that govern the program. Lawmakers in Congress have agreed to temporary changes in the accounting rules as part of a package of telecommunications laws that passed the House, but it's hung up in the Senate. Although popular, the E-Rate program has also been dogged by allegations of waste, fraud and abuse, prompting investigations by federal prosecutors, the FCC and Congress. [NOTE: For more telecom/internet/networking/computer news from the daily media, check out our feature 'Telecom Digest Extra' each day at http://telecom-digest.org/td-extra . New articles daily.] *** FAIR USE NOTICE. This message contains copyrighted material the use of which has not been specifically authorized by the copyright owner. This Internet discussion group is making it available without profit to group members who have expressed a prior interest in receiving the included information in their efforts to advance the understanding of literary, educational, political, and economic issues, for non-profit research and educational purposes only. I believe that this constitutes a 'fair use' of the copyrighted material as provided for in section 107 of the U.S. Copyright Law. If you wish to use this copyrighted material for purposes of your own that go beyond 'fair use,' you must obtain permission from the copyright owner, in this instance Reuters News Service. For more information go to: http://www.law.cornell.edu/uscode/17/107.shtml ------------------------------ Date: Tue, 7 Dec 2004 14:42:44 EST From: Lisa Minter Subject: Experts Push for More Computer Security Efforts The Bush administration should spend more on computer-security research, share threat information with private-sector security vendors, and set up an emergency computer network that would remain functional during Internet blackouts, a computer-security trade group said. The Homeland Security Department should also give more authority to the official who oversees cybersecurity, members of the Cyber Security Industry Alliance said. The Homeland Security Department, which was not immediately available for comment, opposes such a move. "There's certainty across the cybersecurity community that we are still vulnerable and we need to do more," said Amit Yoran, who served as Homeland Security's point man on cybersecurity until he abruptly resigned in October amid reports that he was frustrated with his lack of authority. After the Sept. 11, 2001, attacks, experts warned that power plants and other vital parts of the nation's infrastructure could be compromised through online hacking. Business and home computer users, meanwhile, have struggled with a flood of viruses, spam and other plagues that have evolved in the past year into coordinated criminal attempts to steal bank account numbers and other sensitive information. The Bush administration developed a plan to improve security that relies heavily on industry cooperation and charged the Homeland Security Department with implementing it. Over the past 18 months, Yoran and other Homeland Security officials have worked to increase coordination between law-enforcement officials and security vendors like Symantec Corp. and RSA Security Inc. The government has also struggled to upgrade the security of its own systems, which consistently get failing grades from congressional investigators. Security experts said the government's efforts haven't been nenough. "I think we've raised the profile, but I don't think we got the support within the administration that we should have," said Art Coviello, the chief executive at RSA Security. The government should try to estimate the damages caused by online attacks, secure online control systems for water-treatment plants and other critical infrastructure, and urge the Senate to ratify an international cybercrime treaty, Coviello and other security experts said at a press conference. One especially important move, they said, would be to elevate Yoran's successor to the assistant-secretary level within the Homeland Security Department. House of Representatives lawmakers had included that provision within the massive intelligence reorganization bill, but Homeland Security officials convinced the Senate to leave it out. [NOTE: For more telecom/internet/networking/computer news from the daily media, check out our feature 'Telecom Digest Extra' each day at http://telecom-digest.org/td-extra . New articles daily.] *** FAIR USE NOTICE. This message contains copyrighted material the use of which has not been specifically authorized by the copyright owner. This Internet discussion group is making it available without profit to group members who have expressed a prior interest in receiving the included information in their efforts to advance the understanding of literary, educational, political, and economic issues, for non-profit research and educational purposes only. I believe that this constitutes a 'fair use' of the copyrighted material as provided for in section 107 of the U.S. Copyright Law. If you wish to use this copyrighted material for purposes of your own that go beyond 'fair use,' you must obtain permission from the copyright owner, in this instance, Reuters News Service. For more information go to: http://www.law.cornell.edu/uscode/17/107.shtml ------------------------------ From: [e]num Subject: Wanted to Buy: Rackmount Firewall System Date: 7 Dec 2004 21:24:33 -0800 Organization: http://groups.google.com I am looking for a firewall system that will fit into a 19" rack. I am on a budget of about $350 for this particular piece of hardware. For obvious reasons used even older hardware is acceptable as long as it is operational. Previous research has led me to devices such as Cicso PIX, although these devices are far out of my range. Something similiar is preferred. - [e]num ------------------------------ From: Ringo Langly Subject: Re: Connecting VoIP Device to Home Wiring Date: 8 Dec 2004 06:11:01 -0800 Organization: http://groups.google.com Ringo Langly wrote: > Hi all, > I'm a subscriber of Packet8, and on their VoIP box it says not to > connect it to the home wiring in my home. I'm assuming they get > folks who connect it without unplugging the Ma Bell line and this > blows the box. If I disconnect the outside lines (no voltage on > phonelines) is there any reason not to connect the VoIP box to make > all my phones hot? I only have three phones throughout the house, > and I've been told such a box like this should put out enough > voltage to carry such a load. Just curious -- Thanks, > Ringo > [TELECOM Digest Editor's Note: As long as you *disconnect everything* > pertaining to Bell first, you should be okay. PAT] Hi Pat, That's what I figured, but I thought I'd ask just to be safe. Thanks. Ringo ------------------------------ Subject: Re: Connecting VoIP Device to Home Wiring From: William Warren Organization: Church of the Infinite Possibility Date: Wed, 08 Dec 2004 15:14:53 GMT On 7 Dec 2004 11:24:11 -0800, Ringo Langly wrote: > Hi all, > I'm a subscriber of Packet8, and on their VoIP box it says not to > connect it to the home wiring in my home. I'm assuming they get folks > who connect it without unplugging the Ma Bell line and this blows the > box. If I disconnect the outside lines (no voltage on phonelines) is > there any reason not to connect the VoIP box to make all my phones > hot? I only have three phones throughout the house, and I've been > told such a box like this should put out enough voltage to carry such > a load. Just curious -- Thanks, > Ringo > [TELECOM Digest Editor's Note: As long as you *disconnect everything* > pertaining to Bell first, you should be okay. PAT] Ringo, Make sure you _really_ disconnect EVERYTHING: there may be old transformers on the wires from a Princess phone. You'll also need to check if your burglar alarm and/or utility meter is hooked to the line: they'll need to be reprogrammed if your dialing pattern is different. And _please_ take the time to update the E911 records. The life you save may be your own! FWIW. William (Filter noise from my address for direct replies) ------------------------------ From: Rick Merrill Subject: Re: Connecting VoIP Device to Home Wiring Organization: Comcast Online Date: Wed, 08 Dec 2004 16:25:51 GMT Ringo Langly wrote: > Hi all, > I'm a subscriber of Packet8, and on their VoIP box it says not to > connect it to the home wiring in my home. I'm assuming they get folks > who connect it without unplugging the Ma Bell line and this blows the > box. If I disconnect the outside lines (no voltage on phonelines) is > there any reason not to connect the VoIP box to make all my phones > hot? I only have three phones throughout the house, and I've been > told such a box like this should put out enough voltage to carry such > a load. Just curious -- Thanks, > Ringo > [TELECOM Digest Editor's Note: As long as you *disconnect everything* > pertaining to Bell first, you should be okay. PAT] The other caveat is to make sure that NO ONE ELSE can accidently re-connect! i.e. tape off and lable any lines you disconnect. - RM ------------------------------ From: Carl Navarro Subject: Re: How to Call from A to B to C? Please Help Reply-To: cnavarro@wcnet.org Date: Wed, 08 Dec 2004 10:14:06 GMT Organization: Road Runner High Speed Online http://www.rr.com On Wed, 08 Dec 2004 00:13:22 GMT, M. Henri wrote: > Hi, > I'm currently working on a venture possibility in my small town that > is an hour away from a major City. > Placing call to that major city(town A) is a long distance from my > town (town B). But a town in between (town C) is not a long distance > for both ends. > People would call from town A to town C and reach town B without any > additional charge besides the monthly charge from the services of my > own company. > That software would have to accept 2 set of entry from the clients > touch tone phone: first entry would be some unique client code and the > second entry would be the 10 digits phone number to town B. In the days of 5 cents per minute or less for long distance and VOIP, have you tried www.packet8.net to see if the major city is listed for service? $20/month with unlimited calling to the major city is a lot less than any remote call forwarding solution ... if you have broadband access. Carl Navarro ------------------------------ From: DevilsPGD Subject: Re: Lingo Voip Isn't Really Cheap Date: Wed, 08 Dec 2004 04:00:33 -0700 Organization: Posted via Supernews, http://www.supernews.com In message John Levine wrote: >> LINGO may suck but in my opinion, VERIZON SUCKS WORSE. Any idea why >> Verizon would charge me $68/mth (including taxes) for local service >> when I can get more features from Lingo. > Probably because Lingo only works if you already have a $40/mo > broadband connection. I don't understand why people think that > something they pay for every month is "free". > I have a Vonage phone and like it OK, but I'm under no illusion that > Vonage+broadband is cheaper than POTS. Then you're mistaken. I already have internet connectivity, Vonage charges me $19.95/months for my first line, and $14.95/month for each of my two additional lines, the telco would charge ~$35/month for the features we use (Call display, call waiting and voicemail) Since I don't pay extra for the broadband connection, the actual cost for those additional lines is $19.95+ 2x$14.95. Whenever I feel blue, I start breathing again. [TELECOM Digest Editor's Note: I have said this myself on a few occassions. If you otherwise have broadband connectivity you use for other reasons, it is unfair to dump the entire cost of same onto your VOIP phone bill. PAT] ------------------------------ From: William Moss Subject: Re: R2 Signalling Date: 8 Dec 2004 08:40:48 -0500 Organization: Nortel In article , mara wrote: > Hi, > I have a question. Where are transmitted the multifrequency signals? > (Time slot 16 uses four status bits for signaling purposes -- > Supervisory Signals). Interregister Signalling -- I don't know. Time > slot 16 in frame 0 is used for Super Frame alignment. Maybe in the > next frames (1 through 15)? MF signals are always inband. The Supervisory signals ("hook state") are carried in TS 16. William Moss ------------------------------ From: Ernie B. Subject: Re: Western Electric and Al Capone Date: Wed, 08 Dec 2004 09:04:07 -0500 Organization: MV Communications, Inc. Reply-To: ernie@withheld on request Having lived in the shadow of the Hawthorne works in Cicero, IL in my youth, this book intrigues me. I have been in search of photographs of the interior and exterior of this fabled manufacturing facility. Can you tell me if this book contains any pictures? The web has produced only one vintage photograph of the plant as viewed from 22nd st. I recall that at one time I read that the huge neon sign on the Cermak Road (22nd st.) facade was once the largest neon sign in the world. I could see it's glow from my bedroom at night. I also remember that every Christmas, the tower of the building, located at the corner of Cicero Ave. and Cermak Road was festooned with colored lights from top to bottom. Anyone who knows of a source of photographs of this behemoth plant please contact me at: beeaybay "at" yahoo "dot" com. These pictures would only be used for non-commercial personal purposes. Thanks in advance, Ernie P.S. Pat, please delete the e-mail address that this message originates from. Thank you. Jim Haynes wrote: > I'm currently reading a book, "Manufacturing the Future - a History of > Western Electric" by Stephen B. Adams and Orville R. Butler. > Al Capone had a couple of casinos across Cicero Avenue from the > Western Electric Hawthorne Works. Joseph Juran was a statistics > expert in quality control at Western. After spending some time in > Capone's establishment after hours, Juran noticed that one roulette > wheel operator worked "like a robot", making the operation of his > wheel amenable to statistical analysis and prediction. His expertise > enabled him to win $100, which at the time was several weeks' pay. > (Compare with the much later activities of some college students > documented in the book, "Eudaemonic Pie". They used computers in > briefcases and radios in their shoes in a successful scheme to predict > the behavior of a roulette wheel.) > jhhaynes at earthlink dot net ------------------------------ From: kludge@panix.com (Scott Dorsey) Subject: Re: For $999, a Lifetime of Internet Phone Calls Date: 8 Dec 2004 09:34:47 -0500 Organization: Former users of Netcom shell (1989-2000) Tim Keating wrote: > On Mon, 06 Dec 2004 11:56:25 -0500, Lisa Minter >> For $999, a lifetime of Internet phone calls > Then kiss your money good by. You're betting that this Startup will > still be a viable company in four to five years. Odds are at least > to 5 to 1 against. You'll get better odds in Vegas, playing black > jack. No, you're betting that the startup will still be a viable company in as long as it takes for you to break even. If you're currently spending a hundred bucks a month on LD service, the company can collapse in a year and you will still be ahead. My question is how long it will be before the VoIP stuff transitions over to an "internet phone" model, where your phone talks directly to the other phone over the net when you make a call, with no intermediary needed? As long as both phones are on the net and you don't need a gateway to the POTS service, why should you spend anything over the cost of your connectivity? --scott "C'est un Nagra. C'est suisse, et tres, tres precis." ------------------------------ Date: Wed, 08 Dec 2004 11:00:29 -0500 From: No Spam Subject: CallerID Name was Re: Countering the "Lingo Sucks" Thread > Dan Lanciani wrote: >> tkoppel@adelphia.net (Ted Koppel) wrote: >>> If you're going to complain about Lingo, at least do it >>> for real reasons: >>> - still not sending callerID *name* (although they are sending number) >>> on outgoing calls >> So what does it mean to send callerID name on outgoing calls? I was >> under the (mis?)impression that calling name presentation was normally >> implemented by the terminating switch doing a database dip using the >> SS7-passed calling number. I heard some talk of an end-to-end >> version, but I thought it wasn't generally supported. >> Dan Lanciani >> ddl@danlan.*com > Exactly. If the name on caller ID is not coming up, it's not the > sending telco's fault, it's the receiving telco's fault. Actually, it might not be. Fault can be relative. In KC, Verizon and SBC were mutually refusing to pay each other for database lookups, so neither were displaying name. I suppose it's possible that in this case receiving telco is refusing to pay Verizon's exorbitant rate, but that all depends on the rates in that MSA. The 'sending' of name is usually in exended data elements that are not universally used in the US, which is why you sometimes see it on Avaya-to-Avaya PSTN calls, but not usually between different vendor equipment. I also thought I read somewhere that there was an FCC/PUC kind of requirement. Sending of name does work in Canada, from what I'm told. Joshua (My opinions are my own, and not necessarily those of my employer, but sometimes we agree.) ------------------------------ From: Rick Merrill Subject: Re: Dropping SBC For a VoIP Solution -- Vonage or Packet8 ?? Organization: Comcast Online Date: Wed, 08 Dec 2004 16:24:07 GMT Ringo Langly wrote: > Hi ... it might be the Google Groups screwing-up, not sure but I did > post a review last week yet it's not showing-up in the thread. Either > way here's another quick review after using the phone for a week. > Setting-up the Packet8 VoIP box was cake, and it was ready to go after > maybe 10 minutes. My first delimma was I had to enable DHCP on my > router, which I generally keep turned off. After checking online > there is no way to assign a static IP to the VoIP device they sent me. > Anyway, my first call went well, but there is a noticeable delay when > calling a landline -- and the more traffic going over your broadband > the more the delay. My roommate was running Bittorrent downloads, and > it wasn't until after I disconnected her computer that the delay was > low enough to actually carry on a conversation. > But with the broadband line opened-up (no downloads) it worked great! > The sound quality was excellent and though the delay was maybe 1/4-1/2 > second at times it worked well. I even called the technical support, > which I got right through in like 2 rings, but they couldn't do > anything for the delay. I had update the firmware in the box before > calling them too. > One feature I tried that didn't work well was the call forwarding. I > forwarded the line to my work number, called my house, and within a > couple of rings my work phone rang. The delay was (no kidding) 2-3 > seconds. Total pipe-organ effect, which makes this feature useless > for me. You wired it up wrong, and I'll try to say why. It should be Modem<>TelephoneAdapter<>Router<>PC Then the TA does "QOS"(quality of service) to reduce the through put so that voice quality is maintained (downloads via the router are slowed). Also, it means that you do not have to enable DHCP on the router unless you want it. The TA has a unique MAC address and picks up an IP from your ISP's DHCP. In theory this means you can take your TA with you and call from anywhere there is a broadband connection. - RM ------------------------------ From: Rick Merrill Subject: Re: Will Radar Detectors be Regulated Out of Existence? Organization: Comcast Online Date: Wed, 08 Dec 2004 16:27:38 GMT Bitu wrote: > RADAR DETECTORS WILL BE BANNED SOONER THAN WE WOULD LIKE. Anyways it > does not matter. Radar detectors do not protect you against speed > cameras, red light cameras or automated traffic enforcement equipment. > Police officer operated speed traps are being replaced by cameras at > an alarming rate. > If is as advertised this product called PHOTO BLOCKER SPRAY is our > salvation. They claim that it was tested by the media on their website > www.phantomplate.com On the videos it shows the police saying that it > really works by making your license plate invisible to traffic > cameras. Can anybody tell me if this is true? www.photoblocker.com > please let me know what you think. The spray wears off quickly, but when fresh it creates a reflection that (generally) obscures the camera. The counter to this is to use flashless cameras. It's a back and forth battle. > [TELECOM Digest Editor's Note: We talked about this very subject here > in the Digest a couple months ago. Perhaps some of the partipants in > that conversation will tell you what our group consensus was regards > the images the police use. PAT] ------------------------------ From: Rick Merrill Subject: Re: Lycos Pulls Anti-Spam 'Vigilante' Campaign Organization: Comcast Online Date: Wed, 08 Dec 2004 16:31:00 GMT Lisa Minter wrote: > Just days after Lycos Europe's launch of an anti-spam DDoS tool raised > eyebrows in the security space, the company appears to have scrapped > the campaign. > Early last week, the company released a downloadable screensaver > programmed to launch distributed denial-of-service attacks against > known spam sites, but the move sparked a shooting war with spammers > and attracted condemnation from security researchers. > On Friday, Lycos Europe gave up the ghost, posting a "Stay Tuned" note > on the MakeLoveNotSpam.com Web site it was using to distribute the > screensaver. The Lycos Europe home page, which heavily promoted the > screensaver all week, was also scrubbed clean of any references to the > screensaver. > Company officials did not respond to requests for comment, but > security experts were not mincing words. > "I find the anti-spam downloadable DDoS tool to be without a doubt > irresponsible, possibly illegal, Illegal? Right, and enforced by the international "internet police"? > the wrong impression to users, and possibly the dumbest thing I have > heard of this week," said Adrien de Beaupre, an incident handler with > the SANS Internet Storm Center (ISC). As if that frenchie has a better idea?! > "I can summarize my thoughts into a single word. Dumb. With a capital > 'D,'" de Beaupre told eWEEK.com. > Dan Goldberg, a senior security analyst with MADJiC Consulting Inc., > described the Lycos Europe move as "vigilantism" and said the use of > questionable tactics to deal with a security risk created more > problems that it solved. Looks like Lycos just got ethics! > "In this case, it only causes traffic saturation. It's a noble gesture > to fight back against spammers, but when you try to take down a spam > site, a lot of innocent people get caught in the crossfire. As a big > company, Lycos has to be more responsible than that," Goldberg > said. True, unfortunately. > Evidence of a shooting war in cyberspace was uncovered by anti-virus > vendor F-Secure. The company reported that one of the spam sites under > attack by the Lycos screensaver simply added a Meta Refresh tag that > redirected all incoming traffic back to Lycos. For every force ... > "As an end result, depending on how the Lycos client works, the screen > savers downloaded from MakeLoveNotSpam.com might be attacking the > download site itself," F-Secure said in a notice. > Although the Lycos site is no longer offering the screensaver, MADJiC > Consulting's Goldberg says it's likely the DDoS attacks against the > spammers will continue for some time. > "The software is out there. People have downloaded it and shared it > with their friends and family. It's being used and will continue to be > used," he said. ------------------------------ TELECOM Digest is an electronic journal devoted mostly but not exclusively to telecommunications topics. It is circulated anywhere there is email, in addition to various telecom forums on a variety of networks such as Compuserve and America On Line, Yahoo Groups, and other forums. It is also gatewayed to Usenet where it appears as the moderated newsgroup 'comp.dcom.telecom'. TELECOM Digest is a not-for-profit, mostly non-commercial educational service offered to the Internet by Patrick Townson. All the contents of the Digest are compilation-copyrighted. You may reprint articles in some other media on an occasional basis, but please attribute my work and that of the original author. Contact information: Patrick Townson/TELECOM Digest Post Office Box 50 Independence, KS 67301 Phone: 620-402-0134 Fax 1: 775-255-9970 Fax 2: 530-309-7234 Fax 3: 208-692-5145 Email: editor@telecom-digest.org Subscribe: telecom-subscribe@telecom-digest.org Unsubscribe:telecom-unsubscribe@telecom-digest.org This Digest is the oldest continuing e-journal about telecomm- unications on the Internet, having been founded in August, 1981 and published continuously since then. Our archives are available for your review/research. We believe we are the oldest e-zine/mailing list on the internet in any category! URL information: http://telecom-digest.org Anonymous FTP: mirror.lcs.mit.edu/telecom-archives/archives/ (or use our mirror site: ftp.epix.net/pub/telecom-archives) Email <==> FTP: telecom-archives@telecom-digest.org Send a simple, one line note to that automated address for a help file on how to use the automatic retrieval system for archives files. You can get desired files in email. ************************************************************************* * TELECOM Digest is partially funded by a grant from * * Judith Oppenheimer, President of ICB Inc. and purveyor of accurate * * 800 & Dot Com News, Intelligence, Analysis, and Consulting. * * http://ICBTollFree.com, http://1800TheExpert.com * * Views expressed herein should not be construed as representing * * views of Judith Oppenheimer or ICB Inc. * ************************************************************************* ICB Toll Free News. Contact information is not sold, rented or leased. One click a day feeds a person a meal. Go to http://www.thehungersite.com Copyright 2004 ICB, Inc. and TELECOM Digest. All rights reserved. Our attorney is Bill Levant, of Blue Bell, PA. ************************ DIRECTORY ASSISTANCE JUST 65 CENTS ONE OR TWO INQUIRIES CHARGED TO YOUR CREDIT CARD! REAL TIME, UP TO DATE! SPONSORED BY TELECOM DIGEST AND EASY411.COM SIGN UP AT http://www.easy411.com/telecomdigest ! ************************ --------------------------------------------------------------- Finally, the Digest is funded by gifts from generous readers such as yourself who provide funding in amounts deemed appropriate. Your help is important and appreciated. A suggested donation of fifty dollars per year per reader is considered appropriate. See our address above. Please make at least a single donation to cover the cost of processing your name to the mailing list. All opinions expressed herein are deemed to be those of the author. Any organizations listed are for identification purposes only and messages should not be considered any official expression by the organization. End of TELECOM Digest V23 #585 ****************************** From editor@telecom-digest.org Wed Dec 8 17:21:41 2004 Received: (from ptownson@localhost) by massis.lcs.mit.edu (8.11.6p3/8.11.6) id iB8MLe414383; Wed, 8 Dec 2004 17:21:41 -0500 (EST) Date: Wed, 8 Dec 2004 17:21:41 -0500 (EST) From: editor@telecom-digest.org Message-Id: <200412082221.iB8MLe414383@massis.lcs.mit.edu> X-Authentication-Warning: massis.lcs.mit.edu: ptownson set sender to editor@telecom-digest.org using -f To: ptownson Approved: patsnewlist Subject: TELECOM Digest V23 #586 TELECOM Digest Wed, 8 Dec 2004 17:22:00 EST Volume 23 : Issue 586 Inside This Issue: Editor: Patrick A. Townson Law enforcement, Tech Firms Join to Halt "Phishing" Scams (Lisa Minter) NASA Van Crash in California Leaves 3 Dead (Lisa Minter) Sprint to Upgrade Network (Telecom dailyLead from USTA) Re: Treo 600 Internet Access (John Bartley) Re: Treo650 v Blackberry (John Bartley) Re: Treo650 v Blackberry (Jim Hatfield) Re: How to Call from A to B to C? (NOTvalid@surplus4actors.INFO) Re: Western Electric and Al Capone (Arthur Kamlet) Re: Lycos Pulls Anti-Spam 'Vigilante' Campaign (Steve Sobol) Re: Radar Detectors (Bitu) Re: Will Radar Detectors be Regulated Out of Existence? (Jim Hatfield) Re: Lingo Voip Isn't Really Cheap (Gordon S. Hlavenka) Re: Telecom Taxes: Is A Breakthrough Near? (Angela Epstein) VoicePulse Receives DesignTechnica Editor's Choice Award (Lisa Minter) Telecom and VOIP (Voice over Internet Protocol) Digest for the Internet. All contents here are copyrighted by Patrick Townson and the individual writers/correspondents. Articles may be used in other journals or newsgroups, provided the writer's name and the Digest are included in the fair use quote. By using -any name or email address- included herein for -any- reason other than responding to an article herein, you agree to pay a hundred dollars to the recipients of the email. =========================== Addresses herein are not to be added to any mailing list, nor to be sold or given away without explicit written consent. Chain letters, viruses, porn, spam, and miscellaneous junk are definitely unwelcome. We must fight spam for the same reason we fight crime: not because we are naive enough to believe that we will ever stamp it out, but because we do not want the kind of world that results when no one stands against crime. Geoffrey Welsh =========================== See the bottom of this issue for subscription and archive details and the name of our lawyer; other stuff of interest. ---------------------------------------------------------------------- From: Lisa Minter Subject: Law Enforcement, Tech Firms Join to Halt Online "Phishing" Scams Date: Wed, 8 Dec 2004 16:01:49 EST WASHINGTON (AFP) - A coalition of Internet and finance firms along with law enforcement agencies was launched in a bid to halt the growing number of online scams that lure consumers to fake websites to obtain personal and financial data. The group called Digital PhishNet is a collaborative operation of technology, banking, financial services and online auction firms with law enforcement to tackle "phishing," a scheme based on use of faked or "spoofed" websites. "Phishing," one of the fastest growing types of fraud, uses e-mails appearing to come from a legitimate company and directs recipients to fake websites where they are asked for personal or financial information. The perpetrators often use the scam to steal money, credit card numbers, passwords or identity information. Founders of Digital PhishNet include technology firms America Online, Digital River, EarthLink, Lycos, Microsoft Corp, Network Solutions, VeriSign, along with the FBI , Secret Service, US Federal Trade Commission, and the US Postal Inspection Service. "The key to stopping phishers and bringing them to justice is to identify and target them quickly," said Dan Larkin, unit chief at the FBI's Internet Crime Complaint Center. "Phishers create and dismantle these phony sites very, very fast, stockpiling credit card numbers, passcodes and other personal financial information over the course of just a couple of days, in order to avoid detection. Digital PhishNet is a powerful response to this type of online fraud because it facilitates critical data collection between a large number of the targets of these crimes ... and establishes a pipeline directly to law enforcement, in real time, before the phisher has had time to disappear back into the anonymity of cyberspace." Larkin said a number of law enforcement agencies in Europe and Asia cooperate with US authorities in these matters, but that there was no formal affiliation with the new alliance. Digital PhishNet includes nine of the top 10 US banks and financial services providers, four of the top five Internet service providers and five digital commerce and technology companies, according to a statement. "Phishers are the street muggers of the digital age, using computers instead of weapons to steal financial information and identities from innocent people," said Tatiana Platt, senior vice president for integrity assurance for America Online. "Just like their street criminal brethren, phishers should be tracked down, arrested and locked away, and AOL is pleased to work with law enforcement agencies through Digital PhishNet to help bring them to justice." NOTE: For more telecom/internet/networking/computer news from the daily media, check out our feature 'Telecom Digest Extra' each day at http://telecom-digest.org/td-extra . New articles daily.] *** FAIR USE NOTICE. This message contains copyrighted material the use of which has not been specifically authorized by the copyright owner. This Internet discussion group is making it available without profit to group members who have expressed a prior interest in receiving the included information in their efforts to advance the understanding of literary, educational, political, and economic issues, for non-profit research and educational purposes only. I believe that this constitutes a 'fair use' of the copyrighted material as provided for in section 107 of the U.S. Copyright Law. If you wish to use this copyrighted material for purposes of your own that go beyond 'fair use,' you must obtain permission from the copyright owner, in this instance Reuters News Service. For more information go to: http://www.law.cornell.edu/uscode/17/107.shtml ------------------------------ From: Lisa Minter Subject: NASA Van Crash in California Leaves 3 Dead Date: Wed, 8 Dec 2004 16:03:09 EST By ROBERT JABLON, Associated Press Writer LA CANADA FLINTRIDGE, Calif. - A commuter van from NASA's Jet Propulsion Laboratory tumbled 200 feet off a twisting mountain road Wednesday, killing three people and injuring seven, at least four of them seriously, authorities said. The van was carrying 10 people to the laboratory when it plunged off the Angeles Crest Highway in the Angeles National Forest at about 6:30 a.m. Wednesday morning and rolled down a mountainside about 15 miles north of downtown Los Angeles, Los Angeles County Fire Department inspector Ron Haralson said. "One person was able to get out of the van and make his way up to the road" to get help, Haralson said. The van was carrying six employees of the lab in Pasadena, two contractors and two NASA employees, said Blaine Baggett, a spokesman at JPL, which is the control center for several NASA projects, including the Mars rovers. The victims' names were not immediately released. "It's a very, very sad day for all of us at JPL," Baggett said, adding that employees will be offered grief counseling. Three people were pronounced dead at the scene. One person was flung from the van. Others lay trapped in the battered white van in the middle of a dense forest until firefighters arrived and tore off the doors to reach victims, who were then taken by helicopter to hospitals. Of the survivors, one person was in critical condition, three were in serious condition, two had minor injuries and one person was still being evaluated, Haralson said. The cause of the accident was not immediately known. Clouds and fog shrouded the site, at an altitude of about 1,500 feet. Snow dotted flanks of the mountain, but the road itself was clear. Hundreds of cars a day travel the highway, a twisting, two-lane blacktop with steep drops. Commuters living in the Antelope Valley area northeast of Los Angeles use it as a shortcut to reach a freeway in Pasadena. About 450 of the 5,500 people who work at JPL participate in its vanpool program, which involves about 30 vans, Baggett said. NOTE: For more telecom/internet/networking/computer news from the daily media, check out our feature 'Telecom Digest Extra' each day at http://telecom-digest.org/td-extra . New articles daily. *** FAIR USE NOTICE. This message contains copyrighted material the use of which has not been specifically authorized by the copyright owner. This Internet discussion group is making it available without profit to group members who have expressed a prior interest in receiving the included information in their efforts to advance the understanding of literary, educational, political, and economic issues, for non-profit research and educational purposes only. I believe that this constitutes a 'fair use' of the copyrighted material as provided for in section 107 of the U.S. Copyright Law. If you wish to use this copyrighted material for purposes of your own that go beyond 'fair use,' you must obtain permission from the copyright owner, in this instance Associated Press. For more information go to: http://www.law.cornell.edu/uscode/17/107.shtml ------------------------------ Date: Wed, 8 Dec 2004 13:17:54 EST From: Telecom dailyLead from USTA Subject: Sprint to upgrade network Telecom dailyLead from USTA December 8, 2004 http://www.dailylead.com/latestIssue.jsp?i=17982&l=2017006 TODAY'S HEADLINES NEWS OF THE DAY * Sprint to upgrade network BUSINESS & INDUSTRY WATCH * Japan's a VoIP-over-DSL hotbed * Comcast leases 19,000 miles of fiber for VoIP, TV, data network * Time Warner, Cablevision report rise in VoIP subscribers * Liberty Media in talks to sell News Corp. shares; eyes Sprint towers * AT&T lands $1 billion U.S. Treasury deal USTA SPOTLIGHT * USTA Webinar: LNP Porting Requirements -- Thursday, Dec. 9, 1:00 p.m. EDT EMERGING TECHNOLOGIES * Online gaming challenges broadband capacity REGULATORY & LEGISLATIVE * Nextel kicks off new emergency service Follow the link below to read quick summaries of these stories and others. http://www.dailylead.com/latestIssue.jsp?i=17982&l=2017006 Legal and Privacy information at http://www.dailylead.com/about/privacy_legal.jsp SmartBrief, Inc. 1100 H ST NW, Suite 1000 Washington, DC 20005 ------------------------------ From: John Bartley Date: Wed, 08 Dec 2004 14:58:18 -0500 Subject: Re: Treo 600 Internet Access On 6 Dec 2004, in comp.dcom.telecom wrote: > I have a TREO 600 cell phone with Bell Mobility ... I also have a > Rogers high speed internet account ... Neither Bell nor Rogers can > explain the server pop 3 settings that I can use to access my a-mail > account through the phone ... pop.broadband.rogers.com doesn't work > ... pop-rog.mail.yahoo.com doesn't work (suggestion from Bell tech > support) ... I suspect that suggestion, as Yahoo charges most folks for POP3 access. If you need POP3 access for free, gmail.com and hotpop.com offer free POP3 access. The former requires SSL in your mail app, but I think your Treo 600 has that in your version of VersaMail. Either can keep a copy of all e-mails and also forward them to your Rogers account, so you can pick up messages at home as well as read them on the road. I actually prefer the dual-mailbox system, so I can delete something from my dub-ya and know it's still sitting in my mailbox at home. http://www.rogershelp.com/yahoo/mail/settings.html shows your POP3 and SMTP server settings.... but does Rogers allow access to e-mail via POP3 and SMTP form outside their network? Ask them before you go further. If you hit a witless choom who doesn't know what POP3 is, then go up a level. You might also pose this question to other USENET newsgroups where folks wh o have solved your problem hang out: comp.sys.palmtops.pilot and alt.cellular.rogersatt >> Is there any one to sync the cell so it gets me Rogers e-mail??? Anyone >> can help me??? Syncing is not involved; it's an issue of POP3 access and configuring for it, IF Rogers allows you to access it from the Treo. John Bartley K7AAY kiloseven.blogspot.com ------------------------------ From: John Bartley Date: Wed, 08 Dec 2004 13:21:44 -0500 Subject: Re: Treo650 v Blackberry On 7 Dec 2004, in comp.dcom.telecom Mark wrote: > Has anyone done an investigation as to the specific features and > benefits of each of these devices. Ultimately they seem similar in > almost every way. One thing that I really don't understand is the > email. How does the treo work v the blackberry. There are fundamental differences between the Blackberry and a Treo 600/650, and then some important differences within the same device model: 1. RESALE VALUE As an educational experience, go off to eBay and see what the resale value of a Blackberry is, as compared to the resale value of a Treo 600 or 650. 2. OPERATING SYSTEM The Blackberry runs an obscure proprietary operating s ystem, with very few third-party applications. The Treo runs a third-party well-documented operating system from PalmSource.com, PalmOS 5, with over 2 0,000 applications available. Visit http://freewarepalm.com for an idea of how much is out there for Palms. 3. BUNDLED SOFTWARE The Treo 650 is bundled with Documents To Go from Data Viz, reviewed as being better at editing and viewing Word and Excel files t han even Pocket Word and Pocket Excel on a Pocket PC. You can read/write/e dit M$ Word and Excel documents, loaded through the sync process, insert via an SD card or receive by e-mail attachment. Here's a list of what else you get: Phone, Contacts, Calendar, VersaMail, Messaging (SMS), Media, Camera, Camcorder, Web browser, RealPlayer, Tasks, Memos, Calculator, World Clock, HotSync AE Manager (program for your desktop for syncing data in and out), link to Microsoft Outlook (Windows only), AudiblePlayer (MP3s), Palm=99 eReader (e-books), and games (Zap! 2016 & Solitaire). You can check and see what software comes with the Blackberry model you're interested in at http://www.blackberry.com 4. CELLULAR CARRIER The original Blackberries worked on a two-way paging network which was elegant and very robust, but now is in serious decline. Now, Blackberries work over SMR (mobile radio) networks like NEXTEL, SOUTHERN LINC and MIKE (they're not really cellular companies, although they act like it), as well as on cellular and PCS-cellular carriers like SprintPCS, Telus Mobility, Bell Mobility, Rogers, T-Mobile and Cingular. I am wary of NEXTEL because the data feed is _very_ slow (9.6kbps), even when compared t o poky ol' GPRS (38kbps download with Cingular, Rogers, T-Mobile)), not to mention SPCS speed with their 1xRTT/CDMA system (50-70 kbps in real life). > I heard rumors that for the treo to work your computer must be on, and > it must be forwarding your messages to versamail. Is this true. How > does the blackberry work instead? Any information will be greatly > appreciated. Both the Blackberry and the Treo can work with or without your PC on. If your company has bought an e-mail server running special software from Blackb erry or Good Technology, that can autoforward e-mail to your handheld without requiring your PC be turned on for forwarding. Has your company bought that special server and software and installed it? If not, than your PC can be set up to forward mail, or there's another approach. My Palm machine (a Tungsten W, but the same trick works with Treos) gets an SMS sent to it by T-Mobile (my cellular carrier) whenever an e-mail comes into to any one of several e-mail addresses which meets criteria I specify (from wife, from other family, from Red Cross or has any of a series of special phrases in the Subject line of the message). The e-mail address has to be served by a POP3 or IMAP server, but almost every mail server has the c apability. (Yahoo makes you pay for POP3 access, BTW.) This is a poor man's forwarding server, as I don't get the entire message in the SMS; but, I do get notified, I do see who sent it and the subject line. If it is really worthy, I can pick it up with VersaMail very quickly. The USENET news groups comp.sys.palmtops.pilot (for PalmOS) and comp.sys.ha ndhelds (for Blackberries) are other good places to answer these and more PDA e-mail questions. John Bartley K7AAY Author, Wireless Palm FAQ, Handheld's Cellular Data FAQ & PalmSource Expert Guide to Amateur Radio kiloseven.blogspot.com ------------------------------ From: Jim Hatfield Subject: Re: Treo650 v Blackberry Date: Wed, 08 Dec 2004 18:45:04 +0000 Organization: Insignia Solutions Reply-To: jim.hatfield@insignia.com On 7 Dec 2004 17:45:17 -0800, Mark wrote: > I heard rumors that for the treo to work your computer must be on, and > it must be forwarding your messages to versamail. Is this true. How > does the Blackberry work instead? Any information will be greatly > appreciated. I just set up a Blackberry 7100v on vodafone in the UK for a colleague. The Blackberry is not a mail client at all. The mail client is RIM's server, on which you create an account, tied to the IMEI of the phone, and which you give details of your email settings. The RIM server then pulls email from your mail server and reflects it onto the phone. In order to create the account on the RIM server you have to agree to a massive legal document. I would like to meet one person outside RIM who has read it, let alone agreed with it. The RIM server only holds 10Mb of your mail, and since it pulls mails with attachments this is easy to fill so you have to be careful. The person who is using it is very pleased so I guess this limitation is not so bad. I assume that with the Enterprise version, the "RIM server" is on your own network. Jim Hatfield ------------------------------ From: NOTvalid@surplus4actors.INFO Subject: Re: How to Call from A to B to C? Please Help Date: 8 Dec 2004 12:06:30 -0800 Organization: http://groups.google.com Carl Navarro wrote: > In the days of 5 cents per minute or less for long distance and > VOIP, have you tried www.packet8.net to see if the major city is > listed for service? $20/month with unlimited calling to the major > city is a lot less than any remote call forwarding solution ... if > you have broadband access. After one pays for two legs of a call [either individually or for call forwarding in the junction city] it may be cheaper to use one of the low cost long distance companies. With some VOIP of course you can have a local number in the distant city. I use OneSuite for most of my local NYC calls as well as all long distance. As low as USA-Canada 1.9CPM! Works as prepaid phone card. PIN not needed for calls from home or cell phone. Compare the rates at https://www.onesuite.com/ No monthly fee or minimum. Use promotion code "034720367" for some FREE time. ------------------------------ From: kamlet@panix.com (Arthur Kamlet) Subject: Re: Western Electric and Al Capone Date: 8 Dec 2004 15:29:05 -0500 Organization: PANIX -- Public Access Networks Corp. Reply-To: ArtKamlet@aol.REMOVE.com In article , Ernie B. wrote: > Having lived in the shadow of the Hawthorne works in Cicero, IL in my > youth, this book intrigues me. I have been in search of photographs of > the interior and exterior of this fabled manufacturing facility. Can > you tell me if this book contains any pictures? The web has produced > only one vintage photograph of the plant as viewed from 22nd st. I > recall that at one time I read that the huge neon sign on the Cermak > Road (22nd st.) facade was once the largest neon sign in the world. I > could see it's glow from my bedroom at night. I also remember that > every Christmas, the tower of the building, located at the corner of > Cicero Ave. and Cermak Road was festooned with colored lights from top > to bottom. > Anyone who knows of a source of photographs of this behemoth plant > please contact me at: beeaybay "at" yahoo "dot" com. These pictures > would only be used for non-commercial personal purposes. In the early 1970s I contracted with Dr. Henry MacIlvane Parsons, a former president of the Human Factors [and Ergonomics] Society, to teach a weekly class for engineers working at the Whippany NJ Bell Telephone Laboratories location. He would often arrive early, and poke around the Lab's Whippany Library, and one day came to me very excited. He had found a typewritten research report by the team of researchers who conducted the studies collectively known as the Hawthorne Study and resulted in their concluding the Hawthrorne Effect. This effect says the more attention you provide to workers, the more productive they become. On the margins of this report were pencil notes, including the names of the (female) workers: Mary, Alice, etc, and a few notes about what occurred during the study. Mac Parsons and I re-read major portions of this report, and he contacted Roethelsberger (I have no idea if he is related to Pittsburgh's current freshman quarterback) who was the only author still around, and was a Harvard professor emeritus, and had several long phone conversations with him. The study involved several female relay winders working at the WE Hawthorne plant. The authors gathered them and said they were going to improve their working conditions, and the workers suggested several things that could be done, including higher lighting levels. Sure enough, when higher lighting was in place productivity increased. Later they gathered the workers and said they had heard some complaints that the lighting was too high and people had complained about the glare and so as a favor to everyone they would lower the levels, but not lower than originally. In fact they returned the ligting exactly where it was at the start, and productivity went up even more. Their conclusion: Pay attention to the workers, show them you are concerned, and productivity goes up. Mac Parsons, after his conversations with the author and a careful reading of the typewritten manuscript, came up with an entirely different conclusion. It turned out, and this is not stressed in the paper, or in the analysis of the Hawthorne effect, that in order to be able to measure productivity they installed, for the first time, mechanical counters to count the number of relays wound at each position, and for each team. Each team recognized they could now have sort of a rivalry to see which team could wind the most relays, regardless of lighting. Mac Parson's conclusion: The increase in productivity was due to each team having feedback on their performance and not on the level of lighting. The more they got into the "contest" the more productive they became because they now knew how many relays each wound. To a limit, of course, No one worked their fingers to the bone. And the returning of the lighting to its original level came in the middle of the contest so the women continued to improve to beat the other teams. "Feedback" led to performance improvement, not "paying attention" to them. Installing the counters was thought by the researchers to be a minor procedural item, not worth much attention, while Parsons though it was the central, most crucial part of the study. He published this paper in the mid 1970s in Science, [I ended up with a footnote credit, oh well ] but from what I can tell, everyone trained that the Hawthorne Effect was due to being nice to workers still train others in their belief. That's life. -- Art Kamlet ArtKamlet @ AOL.com Columbus OH K2PZH ------------------------------ From: Steve Sobol Subject: Re: Lycos Pulls Anti-Spam 'Vigilante' Campaign Date: Wed, 08 Dec 2004 12:55:00 -0800 Organization: Glorb Internet Services, http://www.glorb.com Rick Merrill wrote: >> "I find the anti-spam downloadable DDoS tool to be without a doubt >> irresponsible, possibly illegal, > Illegal? Right, and enforced by the international "internet police"? It's a violation of several countries' laws. >> the wrong impression to users, and possibly the dumbest thing I have >> heard of this week," said Adrien de Beaupre, an incident handler with >> the SANS Internet Storm Center (ISC). > As if that frenchie has a better idea?! SANS is an internationally known and respected computer security organization. Your idiotic implication that the person who was quoted is clueless because he's French makes you look ignorant. >> Dan Goldberg, a senior security analyst with MADJiC Consulting Inc., >> described the Lycos Europe move as "vigilantism" and said the use of >> questionable tactics to deal with a security risk created more >> problems that it solved. > Looks like Lycos just got ethics! I've seen this discussed in many forums where it has been said that this whole bit of idiocy on the part of Lycos was just a publicity stunt, and *as a publicity stunt*, it worked pretty well. It was a stupid, criminal publicity stunt, but people paid attention to the company. Of course, aside from the collateral damage they caused, aside from the fact that they caused sites to go down when they insisted that their little ploy wouldn't DDoS anything, now the spammers have responded by releasing a piece of software that looks like Lycos's screen saver but is a trojan designed to launch a DDoS on Lycos. Quite predictable. JustThe.net Internet & New Media Services, http://JustThe.net/ Steven J. Sobol, Geek In Charge / 888.480.4NET (4638) / sjsobol@JustThe.net PGP Key available from your friendly local key server (0xE3AE35ED) Apple Valley, California Nothing scares me anymore. I have three kids. ------------------------------ From: Bitu Subject: Re: Radar Detectors Date: 8 Dec 2004 10:39:11 -0800 Organization: http://groups.google.com > RADAR DETECTORS WILL BE BANNED SOONER THAN WE WOULD LIKE. Anyways it > does not matter. Radar detectors do not protect you against speed > cameras, red light cameras or automated traffic enforcement equipment. > Police officer operated speed traps are being replaced by cameras at an > alarming rate. But thank God there is another solution for this. It is > called PhotoBlocker Spray. I have been using it for two years. Two years ago I was getting photo-radar tickets every three months. Then I saw a FOX News report that showed how well this PHOTOBLOCKER spray worked. It showed Denver police Department testing it and cops actually called it surprisingly effective. I have tested the spray myself. I triggered one of these nasty cameras intentionally one early morning when there was nobody around. I saw the flash go off but I have yet to receive any tickets. It is a nice feeling to know that I am not driving naked. These cameras are not for safety they are all about revenue. I have donated enough money to the local police department. They are not going to get me again for driving 5 miles over the speed limit. See for yourself. They have the police test results on their web site www.phantomplate.com Cliff Sharp wrote: > I earlier wrote about radar detectors and offered a defense. TELECOM > Moderator noted in reply: >> [Moderator's Note: First, try that explanation around here and a lot >> of Chicago police would be upside your head in a minute. Second, for > True, but they'd do the same in any other matter where they tried > to assert jurisdiction while having none. >> all your knowledge of FCC regs, how come you failed to mention the one >> which specifically says you are forbidden to act upon or profit from >> transmissions you happen to overhear which are not intended for you? > Well, first, you're not forbidden to act upon overhearing a > transmission, you're forbidden to act upon its content. Similarly, > you can't profit from the content, but there's no prohibition against > profiting from knowing that someone's on the air (although I can't > imagine too many other uses for that tidbit of information). >> What you hear on WGN-Channel 9 is intended for you to act upon and >> benefit from, i.e. the sponsor's messages. Radio transmissions in the >> frequency range where RADAR (it is an acronym for something, I forget > RAdio Detection And Ranging. >> what right now) are *not* broadcasts. They are transmissions by >> (presumably) licensed radio operators and/or their employees (the >> police). They are not for your ears. > There's a Supreme Court decision on that; I lost the papers during > my last move, but the folks at Escort (formerly Cincinnati Microwave) > are happy to send out their radar packet to anyone who asks, and it's > cited in there chapter and verse. Paraphrased, the Supreme Court > Justice who wrote the decision said something to the effect that if > the police can use sneaky, surreptitious means to spy on your > activities (and in most cases without probable cause), the citizen has > every right to avail himself of any and all means to detect such spying. > But radar transmissions are broadcasts anyway. They are rarely > specifically aimed, but sent to bounce off many cars (whether or not > the operator can see many cars in the beam path) and detect the > greatest frequency deviation caused by the Doppler effect. I believe > 47 CFR 90 defines them that way, but don't have a copy to refer to and > can't confirm. This is because the police aren't transmitting to > themselves or other officers, but transmitting to the vehicle(s) and > monitoring the echo. >> How do you act upon or benefit from what you overhear on RADAR? You >> slow your car down don't you? You act in your own best interest to >> avoid a ticket, don't you? That amounts to acknowledging that you >> overheard something on the radio, which is illegal to do. You can't > See the Supreme Court mention above; the Supremes don't agree. > In any event, the primary reason I bought a radar detector wasn't > to speed. First, my very first speeding ticket was a fraud, and only > luck got me out of it; the officer who wrote it had been thrown off > the force before I got to court, and the unofficial scuttlebutt was > that some judge had noticed that all his tickets for any given day > showed exactly the same speed. He was apparently getting one good > reading and using the same reading all day without resetting his gun. > Had I had a detector at that time, I could have asked the officer to > repeat his performance of getting a reading on me without setting off > my detector, and could have testified in court that he wasn't > transmitting when I was within his range, had he not been caught at > it. > The second reason is that everyone (now, admit it) can get a bit > heavy on the foot without realizing it from time to time. If I toss a > gum wrapper on the sidewalk, seldom do I get more of a reaction than > "Pick it up", i.e. I get a second chance to correct my "error". With > radar I don't get that chance. The detector serves to remind me to > check my speed and make sure I'm doing what I wanted to do, that is to > stay within the limits (or at least with the speed of traffic). > Finally, there are occasional reasons where I use the detector to > speed with impunity. Most of them involve those clowns who do 75 to > pass me and then slow down to 40 until I pass them again. Once I had > a bleeding passenger who had to get to the hospital fast, and didn't > need the aggravation of bleeding at 25 MPH or that of bleeding at 0 > MPH while some officer wasted five precious minutes stopping me. >> two-way radio transmissions then benefit from them is illegal. You >> also seem somehow to think that a local police officer cannot detain >> or arrest you for violations of federal law. They certainly can; they >> can take cases to the US Attorney just as easily as they can take > They can most certainly detain you in their capacity as duly > authorized agents of the law, but they cannot confiscate property that > does not cause an immediate danger to anyone or anything, and once the > Feds are in on it their only recourse is to act as witnesses to the > act. That takes the whole thing out of the purview of state law, > which is the only place that radar detectors are banned. >> cases to the local prosecutor. Most cops would tell you that you have >> a smart mouth. PAT] > With good reason, I might add. :-) But again, they'd do the same > in any situation where they tried to assert jurisdiction or authority > they didn't have. > And there's always the alternative of building a 100 watt transmit- > ter at 10.495 GHz and calling a Morse code CQ whenever I see a squad > ... :-) > I don't have the 800 number handy, but I believe Escort Corp. still > sends out those "radar packets" free for those who'd like to see the > court citations and quotes from the justice. ------------------------------ From: Jim Hatfield Subject: Re: Will Radar Detectors be Regulated Out of Existence? Date: Wed, 08 Dec 2004 18:52:49 +0000 Organization: Insignia Solutions Reply-To: jim.hatfield@insignia.com On 7 Dec 2004 16:18:52 -0800, Bitu wrote: > If is as advertised this product called PHOTO BLOCKER SPRAY is our > salvation. They claim that it was tested by the media on their website > www.phantomplate.com On the videos it shows the police saying that it > really works by making your license plate invisible to traffic > cameras. Can anybody tell me if this is true? www.photoblocker.com > please let me know what you think. Please refer to http://www.ukspeedtraps.co.uk/platespray.htm Jim Hatfield ------------------------------ Date: Wed, 08 Dec 2004 12:11:10 -0600 From: Gordon S. Hlavenka Reply-To: nospam@crashelex.com Organization: Crash Electronics Subject: Re: Lingo Voip Isn't Really Cheap John Levine wrote: > I have a Vonage phone and like it OK, but I'm under no illusion that > Vonage+broadband is cheaper than POTS. I closed my business a couple of years ago but am keeping the phone numbers in case I start up again. One of these numbers (630-832) is in my local CO and the other (630-691) is not. So I have two lines in my home: The local business number and my personal number. Through the magic of Remote Call Forwarding I get the foreign number's calls on the business line. My bill (a separate account from my personal line) for the two business lines runs about $50/mo. So I'm thinking I can set up a Vonage account, port the two business numbers to it and probably come out cheaper than paying SBC. The thing is, I _have_ the broadband connection. I'm going to have it regardless of whether I use SBC or Vonage for my phone service. So the cost of broadband doesn't figure into the calculation. Here's a tangentially related question: The Vonage/Linksys hardware has two phone jacks on the back. Are these separate jacks? Can I register two numbers on a single adapter and have one ring to the "Phone1" jack and the other to the "Phone2" jack? I realize two numbers require twice the bandwidth for simultaneous use (Duh, but many people seem to be surprised by this). Gordon S. Hlavenka http://www.crashelectronics.com "If we imagined he could _find_ the car, we could pretend it might be fixed." - Calvin ------------------------------ From: Angela Epstein Date: Wed, 8 Dec 2004 12:44:11 -0500 Subject: Telecom Taxes: Is A Breakthrough Near? Bad news for the industry - the consumers and a terrible message to the innovators - Jack Decker notes: Note who is apparently being left out of these talks -- phone customers! Wonder if there is any hope they might finally repeal the Spanish-American War tax (now known as the Federal Excise Tax) on phone bills? I suppose it would be too much to hope that they would get rid of the "corporate welfare" charges on the bills (USF and similar charges that really don't need to be there). http://www.businessweek.com/magazine/content/04_50/c3912064_mz013.htm DECEMBER 13, 2004 * Editions: Edition Preference Washington Outlook Edited by Mike McNamee Telecom Taxes: Is A Breakthrough Near? In the battle over whether states can tax new technologies, the nation's governors won a skirmish in November. While Congress agreed to temporarily restore a ban on state taxes on monthly Internet access charges, anti-tax lawmakers failed to bar state levies on Internet phone calls -- known as Voice-over Internet Protocol (VoIP). The issue is critical because VoIP promises to dominate the phone business within the next decade. Now the states are going on the offensive. BusinessWeek has learned that two new initiatives may set the stage for dramatic changes in the way all telecom services are taxed. For consumers, that may mean an end to the stew of mind-numbing charges levied by state and local governments. But it may also mean that VoIP, now tax-free in most locales, will be hit by the same taxes as traditional phone services. At stake: $20 billion a year in taxes. To protect that revenue, the National Governors Assn. has asked officials representing states, cities, and counties to meet with top telecom officials in Washington on Dec. 15 to begin talks aimed at resolving the tax issue. The goal: Simplify levies while taxing all phone services equally -- no matter what technology delivers them. "It's important that we work through this in a cooperative fashion," says Virginia's Democratic governor, Mark Warner, president of the NGA. Full story at: http://www.businessweek.com/magazine/content/04_50/c3912064_mz013.htm ------------------------------ From: Lisa Minter Date: Wed, 08 Dec 2004 12:48:09 -0500 Subject: VoicePulse Receives DesignTechnica Editor's Choice Award Jack Decker notes: VoicePulse is the VoIP company that has the best coverage of Michigan (number of ratecenters served) of all the companies that put that information on their web sites. http://www.prnewswire.com/cgi-bin/stories.pl?ACCT=104&STORY=/www/story/12-07-2004/0002588066&STORY&EDATE= VoicePulse Receives DesignTechnica Editor's Choice Award High-tech review website touts exclusive VoIP features JAMESBURG, N.J., Dec. 7 /PRNewswire/ -- VoicePulse Inc. announced it has received the esteemed Editor's Choice Award by DesignTechnica, honoring it as one of the premier Voice-over-IP phone service providers. DesignTechnica presented VoicePulse with the award after extensively testing their service for several months. According to Jeff Fila, senior editor of DesignTechnica, "Setup of the VoicePulse system was insanely easy. VoicePulse offers more advanced features than its biggest competitor and a faster response time on its website." "DesignTechnica has a track record for selecting successful products", said Ravi Sakaria, President & CEO of VoicePulse, "so we're very pleased to receive this award from them." VoicePulse recognizes the potential of VoIP and is committed to providing an unparalleled form of telephone communication that can be customized to meet the individual needs of each consumer. The advanced technology that drives VoIP allows for the development of new and innovative features. For example, VoicePulse offers Telemarketer Block, which identifies calls from telemarketers and hangs up on them automatically. "In addition to our features, we believe VoicePulse's success in the VoIP industry will be determined by the customer's experience in all aspects of the service -- features, call quality, account management and especially customer service," says Sakaria. "For us, the customer truly is our number one priority." In addition to DesignTechnica's Editor's Choice Award, VoicePulse also earned the PC World Best Buy award this past May. In September, they were the highest rated VoIP provider in PC Magazine's roundup that compared them to Vonage's DigitalVoice and AT&T's CallVantage. ABOUT VOICEPULSE VoicePulse is a New Jersey based communications company that uses its VoIP network to deliver advanced features and high-quality phone service to residential and small-business consumers. The company leads the industry in delivering innovative features and excellent customer service. ABOUT DESIGNTECHNICA DesignTechnica reveals the future of tomorrow's life enhancing technology through product first looks, reviews, and editorials. An indispensable resource for hi-tech lifestyle enthusiasts, DesignTechnica showcases a rich mix of the technology insight and analysis from both fresh new voices and seasoned hi-tech veterans. From tech gadgetry to home theater to office furniture, DesignTechnica is your gateway to the cutting edge. Contact: Rima Vaghasiya 732-339-5100 rima@voicepulse.com SOURCE VoicePulse Inc. Web Site: http://www.voicepulse.com ------------------------------ TELECOM Digest is an electronic journal devoted mostly but not exclusively to telecommunications topics. It is circulated anywhere there is email, in addition to various telecom forums on a variety of networks such as Compuserve and America On Line, Yahoo Groups, and other forums. It is also gatewayed to Usenet where it appears as the moderated newsgroup 'comp.dcom.telecom'. TELECOM Digest is a not-for-profit, mostly non-commercial educational service offered to the Internet by Patrick Townson. All the contents of the Digest are compilation-copyrighted. You may reprint articles in some other media on an occasional basis, but please attribute my work and that of the original author. Contact information: Patrick Townson/TELECOM Digest Post Office Box 50 Independence, KS 67301 Phone: 620-402-0134 Fax 1: 775-255-9970 Fax 2: 530-309-7234 Fax 3: 208-692-5145 Email: editor@telecom-digest.org Subscribe: telecom-subscribe@telecom-digest.org Unsubscribe:telecom-unsubscribe@telecom-digest.org This Digest is the oldest continuing e-journal about telecomm- unications on the Internet, having been founded in August, 1981 and published continuously since then. Our archives are available for your review/research. We believe we are the oldest e-zine/mailing list on the internet in any category! URL information: http://telecom-digest.org Anonymous FTP: mirror.lcs.mit.edu/telecom-archives/archives/ (or use our mirror site: ftp.epix.net/pub/telecom-archives) Email <==> FTP: telecom-archives@telecom-digest.org Send a simple, one line note to that automated address for a help file on how to use the automatic retrieval system for archives files. You can get desired files in email. ************************************************************************* * TELECOM Digest is partially funded by a grant from * * Judith Oppenheimer, President of ICB Inc. and purveyor of accurate * * 800 & Dot Com News, Intelligence, Analysis, and Consulting. * * http://ICBTollFree.com, http://1800TheExpert.com * * Views expressed herein should not be construed as representing * * views of Judith Oppenheimer or ICB Inc. * ************************************************************************* ICB Toll Free News. Contact information is not sold, rented or leased. One click a day feeds a person a meal. Go to http://www.thehungersite.com Copyright 2004 ICB, Inc. and TELECOM Digest. All rights reserved. Our attorney is Bill Levant, of Blue Bell, PA. ************************ DIRECTORY ASSISTANCE JUST 65 CENTS ONE OR TWO INQUIRIES CHARGED TO YOUR CREDIT CARD! REAL TIME, UP TO DATE! SPONSORED BY TELECOM DIGEST AND EASY411.COM SIGN UP AT http://www.easy411.com/telecomdigest ! ************************ --------------------------------------------------------------- Finally, the Digest is funded by gifts from generous readers such as yourself who provide funding in amounts deemed appropriate. Your help is important and appreciated. A suggested donation of fifty dollars per year per reader is considered appropriate. See our address above. Please make at least a single donation to cover the cost of processing your name to the mailing list. All opinions expressed herein are deemed to be those of the author. Any organizations listed are for identification purposes only and messages should not be considered any official expression by the organization. End of TELECOM Digest V23 #586 ****************************** From editor@telecom-digest.org Thu Dec 9 01:34:42 2004 Received: (from ptownson@localhost) by massis.lcs.mit.edu (8.11.6p3/8.11.6) id iB96YgY18518; Thu, 9 Dec 2004 01:34:42 -0500 (EST) Date: Thu, 9 Dec 2004 01:34:42 -0500 (EST) From: editor@telecom-digest.org Message-Id: <200412090634.iB96YgY18518@massis.lcs.mit.edu> X-Authentication-Warning: massis.lcs.mit.edu: ptownson set sender to editor@telecom-digest.org using -f To: ptownson Approved: patsnewlist Subject: TELECOM Digest V23 #587 TELECOM Digest Thu, 9 Dec 2004 01:35:00 EST Volume 23 : Issue 587 Inside This Issue: Editor: Patrick A. Townson VoicePulse Plans Video Phone Service (Lisa Minter) Invitation to MIT and Belgrade 2005, c/ba (IPSI-2005 MIT and Belgrade) Apple in Cybersquatting Fight Over ITunes Website (Lisa Minter) 2004 Was Year of Netsky Worm, Web Firm Sophos Says (Lisa Minter) Re: Lingo Voip Isn't Really Cheap (DevilsPGD) Re: Lingo Voip Isn't Really Cheap (Tony P.) Re: For $999, a Lifetime of Internet Phone Calls (DevilsPGD) Re: Connecting VoIP Device to Home Wiring (Tony P.) Re: Lycos Pulls Anti-Spam 'Vigilante' Campaign (DevilsPGD) Re: Western Electric and Al Capone (Peter Brooks) Telecom and VOIP (Voice over Internet Protocol) Digest for the Internet. All contents here are copyrighted by Patrick Townson and the individual writers/correspondents. Articles may be used in other journals or newsgroups, provided the writer's name and the Digest are included in the fair use quote. By using -any name or email address- included herein for -any- reason other than responding to an article herein, you agree to pay a hundred dollars to the recipients of the email. =========================== Addresses herein are not to be added to any mailing list, nor to be sold or given away without explicit written consent. Chain letters, viruses, porn, spam, and miscellaneous junk are definitely unwelcome. We must fight spam for the same reason we fight crime: not because we are naive enough to believe that we will ever stamp it out, but because we do not want the kind of world that results when no one stands against crime. Geoffrey Welsh =========================== See the bottom of this issue for subscription and archive details and the name of our lawyer; other stuff of interest. ---------------------------------------------------------------------- From: Lisa Minter Date: Wed, 08 Dec 2004 22:28:53 -0500 Subject: VoicePulse Plans Video Phone Service http://www.prnewswire.com/cgi-bin/stories.pl?ACCT=109&STORY=/www/story/12-08-2004/0002590652&EDATE= http://www.voicepulse.com Company to offer video service using award-winning network JAMESBURG, N.J., Dec. 8 /PRNewswire/ -- VoicePulse Inc. today announced plans to enhance the consumer's telephone experience by incorporating videophone service into their existing Voice-over-IP service in the second half of 2005. With the recent widespread use of camera and video-enhanced mobile phones, company executives believe videophones in the home are the next logical step. Videophone service allows callers to both see and hear the other parties while carrying on a conversation. Until recently, the prohibitive cost of videophone equipment has prevented increased use in the residential market. "We've always built our service with the intention of providing a huge array of new features, including video", said Ravi Sakaria, President & CEO of VoicePulse, "Our plans to support videophones are in line with our efforts to lead the industry in innovation." The VoicePulse Broadband Phone Service has earned the PC World Best Buy award and PC Magazine's VoIP Provider of the Year compared to services including Vonage's DigitalVoice and AT&T's CallVantage. VoicePulse allows consumers to use their existing cable or DSL Internet connection for phone service. The service includes traditional features such as Caller ID, Call Waiting, Call Forward and Voicemail as well as a host of advanced features such as Distinctive Ring, Call Filters, Telemarketer Block and Anonymous Call Block. Consumers need only a high-speed Internet connection and an ordinary touch-tone telephone to use the service. VoicePulse uses Voice-over-IP technology to deliver broadband phone service. VoicePulse's services include: * Unlimited local, regional and US long distance calling for $24.99 per month; * Unlimited local, regional and 200 US long distance minutes for $14.99 per month * Advanced features including Voicemail, Telemarketer Blocking, Do Not Disturb, Anonymous Call Rejection, Distinctive Ring * Voicemail with optional e-mail delivery of messages as sound attachments * Choose your own area code * Low international calling rates About VoicePulse VoicePulse is a New Jersey based communications company that uses its VoIP network to deliver advanced features and high-quality phone service to residential and small-business consumers. The company leads the industry in delivering innovative features and excellent customer service. For more information about VoicePulse, please visit http://www.voicepulse.com. VoicePulse is a trademark of VoicePulse Inc. For more information, please contact: Rima Vaghasiya 732-339-5100 rima@voicepulse.com SOURCE VoicePulse Web Site: http://www.voicepulse.com ------------------------------ Date: Thu, 9 Dec 2004 02:26:53 +0100 From: IPSI-2005 MIT and Belgrade Subject: Invitation to MIT and Belgrade 2005, c/ba Dear potential Speaker: On behalf of the organizing committee, I would like to extend a cordial invitation for you to attend one or both of the upcoming IPSI BgD multidisciplinary, interdisciplinary, and transdisciplinary conferences. The first one will be in Belgrade, Serbia and Montenegro: IPSI-2005 BELGRADE University of Belgrade (arrival: 2 June 05 / departure: 5 June 05) Deadlines: 1 March 05 (abstract) & 15 April 05 (full paper) The second one will be in Massachusetts, USA : IPSI-2005 USA Hotel@MIT, Cambridge (arrival: 7 July 05 / departure: 10 July 05) Deadlines: 20 February 05 (abstract) / 20 March 05 (full paper) All IPSI BgD conferences are non-profit. They bring together the elite of the world of science; so far, we have had seven Nobel Laureates speaking at the opening ceremonies. The conferences always take place in some of the most attractive places of the world. All those who come to IPSI conferences once, always love to come back (because of the unique professional quality and the extremely creative atmosphere); lists of past participants are on the web, as well as details of future conferences. These conferences are in line with the newest recommendations of the US National Science Foundation and of the EU research sponsoring agencies, to stress multidisciplinary, interdisciplinary, and transdisciplinary research (M.I.T. research). The speakers and activities at the conferences truly support this type of scientific interaction. Topics of interest include, but are not limited to: * Internet * Computer Science and Engineering * Mobile Communications/Computing for Science and Business * Management and Business Administration * Education * e-Medicine * e-Oriented Bio Engineering/Science and Molecular Engineering/Science * Environmental Protection * e-Economy * e-Law * Technology Based Art and Art to Inspire Technology Developments * Internet Psychology If you would like more information on either conference, please reply to this e-mail message. If you plan to submit an abstract and paper, please let us know immediately for planning purposes. Sincerely Yours, Prof. V. Milutinovic, Chairman IPSI BgD Conferences ------------------------------ From: Lisa Minter Subject: Apple in Cybersquatting Fight Over ITunes Website Date: Wed, 8 Dec 2004 16:04:35 EST LONDON (Reuters) - U.S. computer giant Apple is locked in a cybersquatting battle with a 22-year-old British Internet whiz kid over the itunes.co.uk Web Site, a domain the company wants for its chain of iTunes online music stores. Benjamin Cohen, who joined the Internet's millionaires club after founding the Web Site Sojewish when he was just 17, said on Wednesday he registered itunes.co.uk during the dotcom boom in November, 2000, and wouldn't give it up without a fight. He said Apple applied to trademark "iTunes" in October 2000, but that the application wasn't made public until December. "In the course of discussions with Apple they offered to buy the domain, but it was a very low offer, and we couldn't accept it," Cohen told Reuters. "They have issued legal proceedings to gain control of it, but we registered it fairly and squarely, and we don't feel we've done anything wrong. We're not going to back down," he added. A spokeswoman for Apple said the company was not commenting on the case. Surfers logging on to itunes.co.uk arrive at Cohen's company QuickQuid.com, an online loyalty site that rewards surfers for shopping. He runs the company from his home. Apples iTunes store, paired with its popular iPod music player, is the market-leading online music store in the United States, but its entry into Europe was delayed by red tape. Apple launched iTunes in Britain, France and Germany in June. NOTE: For more telecom/internet/networking/computer news from the daily media, check out our feature 'Telecom Digest Extra' each day at http://telecom-digest.org/td-extra . New articles daily. *** FAIR USE NOTICE. This message contains copyrighted material the use of which has not been specifically authorized by the copyright owner. This Internet discussion group is making it available without profit to group members who have expressed a prior interest in receiving the included information in their efforts to advance the understanding of literary, educational, political, and economic issues, for non-profit research and educational purposes only. I believe that this constitutes a 'fair use' of the copyrighted material as provided for in section 107 of the U.S. Copyright Law. If you wish to use this copyrighted material for purposes of your own that go beyond 'fair use,' you must obtain permission from the copyright owner, in this instance, Reuters News Service. For more information go to: http://www.law.cornell.edu/uscode/17/107.shtml ------------------------------ From: Lisa Minter Subject: 2004 Was Year of Netsky Worm, Web Firm Sophos Says Date: Wed, 8 Dec 2004 16:09:52 EST From Tech Tuesday (Reuters) The worm accounted for almost a quarter of all virus incidents reported, Sophos said in a report on Wednesday, with four other Netsky variants also making it into the top 10, and the Sasser worm by the same writer taking third place. "2004 was the year of the Netsky," Sophos senior technology consultant Graham Cluley said in a report covering the period December 2003 to November 2004, adding that Netsky-P was still the world's most widely reported virus, 8 months after its discovery. Sasser, a worm which spreads not via email but via the Internet, attacking Windows computers not protected with a security patch from Microsoft, was first seen just two weeks after the patch was made available. "The time period between patch availability and worm exploit is getting shorter than ever," Cluley said. Overall, Sophos protected against more than 97,000 viruses, worms and Trojan Horses -- which lurk inside a device without the user knowing it -- during the year. More than 10,000 were new viruses. All of the top 10 attacked Windows computers. "Motivated by the thought of spreading their malicious code as far and wide as possible, virus writers are likely to continue targeting the ubiquitous Microsoft and its users in 2005 and beyond." Sophos said it had also discovered a new type of "phishing" attack in 2004 -- in which fraudsters send out emails allegedly from real companies asking recipients for personal and financial information. Instead of luring computer users to a fake Website to steal their banking and credit-card details, the new wave of phishers use Trojan Horses to lie in wait for users to visit real banking Websites and then secretly record login processes. The year's top hoax was a chain letter sent via Microsoft Hotmail, it said. Although hoaxes are not viral they clog up mail servers and confuse users. During the year, a number of high-profile arrests were made including that of the 18-year-old German, who has confessed to the Sasser worm and is accused of creating Netsky. An Australian email scammer who stole more than 2 million pounds ($3.9 million) was jailed, while Brazilian authorities made more than 50 arrests for Trojan phishing and the UK's National Hi-Tech Crime Unit made several arrests related to phishing, Sophos said. But Sophos called for a formal framework to make it easier to report virus infections or unsolicited spam mail. "Despite an increased number of arrests and convictions of spammers, the spam problem shows no sign of disappearing," it said. "Those responsible for writing malware are more active than ever before." ($1=.5174 Pound) NOTE: For more telecom/internet/networking/computer news from the daily media, check out our feature 'Telecom Digest Extra' each day at http://telecom-digest.org/td-extra . New articles daily. *** FAIR USE NOTICE. This message contains copyrighted material the use of which has not been specifically authorized by the copyright owner. This Internet discussion group is making it available without profit to group members who have expressed a prior interest in receiving the included information in their efforts to advance the understanding of literary, educational, political, and economic issues, for non-profit research and educational purposes only. I believe that this constitutes a 'fair use' of the copyrighted material as provided for in section 107 of the U.S. Copyright Law. If you wish to use this copyrighted material for purposes of your own that go beyond 'fair use,' you must obtain permission from the copyright owner, in this instance Tech Tuesday/Reuters News Service. For more information go to: http://www.law.cornell.edu/uscode/17/107.shtml ------------------------------ From: DevilsPGD Subject: Re: Lingo Voip Isn't Really Cheap Date: Wed, 08 Dec 2004 16:00:26 -0700 Organization: Posted via Supernews, http://www.supernews.com In message Gordon S. Hlavenka wrote: > Here's a tangentially related question: The Vonage/Linksys hardware has > two phone jacks on the back. Are these separate jacks? Can I register > two numbers on a single adapter and have one ring to the "Phone1" jack > and the other to the "Phone2" jack? I realize two numbers require twice > the bandwidth for simultaneous use (Duh, but many people seem to be > surprised by this). Yes, you can have different numbers, but they need to be attached to the same Vonage account. Use the "Add additional line" option in the Vonage website. > [TELECOM Digest Editor's Note: I have said this myself on a few > occassions. If you otherwise have broadband connectivity you use for > other reasons, it is unfair to dump the entire cost of same onto your > VOIP phone bill. PAT] Not only that, but even if I get a dedicated cable modem for my Vonage lines, I can get broadband for $29.95/month. Add to that my three Vonage lines ($19.95+2x$14.95) and we're only talking $79.80/month INCLUDING the broadband connection. Compared to a phone line which is just over $35/month (For the line+Voicemail+Call Display+Call Waiting). It would cost $105/month for those three POTS lines. So, in this situation VoIP comes out cheaper even if you put 100% of the broadband connection on the VoIP side of the game. ================ A well-dressed man walks into a bar and asks a woman to sleep with him for $1M. The woman is excited and she gives immediate consent: "Of course I'll sleep with you!". Then the man asks, "will you sleep with me for $5?". The woman indignantly replies, "Of course not! What do you think I am?". The man replies, "We've already established what you are; now we're merely haggling over the price." ------------------------------ From: Tony P. Subject: Re: Lingo Voip Isn't Really Cheap Organization: ATCC Date: Wed, 8 Dec 2004 18:23:07 -0500 In article , johnl@iecc.com says... >> LINGO may suck but in my opinion, VERIZON SUCKS WORSE. Any idea why >> Verizon would charge me $68/mth (including taxes) for local service >> when I can get more features from Lingo. > Probably because Lingo only works if you already have a $40/mo > broadband connection. I don't understand why people think that > something they pay for every month is "free". In my case, Vonage + Broadband = $64 a month. For the same voice features I was paying Verizon $87 a month. So a nominal savings of $23 dollars is there but you have to remember that I use the broadband connection for more than just my phone service. Vonage uses 90Kbits of my 4Mbps down and 384Kbps up. So in reality it's actually a much greater savings. ------------------------------ From: DevilsPGD Subject: Re: For $999, a Lifetime of Internet Phone Calls Date: Wed, 08 Dec 2004 16:00:25 -0700 Organization: Posted via Supernews, http://www.supernews.com In message kludge@panix.com (Scott Dorsey) wrote: > No, you're betting that the startup will still be a viable company in > as long as it takes for you to break even. If you're currently > spending a hundred bucks a month on LD service, the company can > collapse in a year and you will still be ahead. > My question is how long it will be before the VoIP stuff transitions > over to an "internet phone" model, where your phone talks directly to > the other phone over the net when you make a call, with no > intermediary needed? As long as both phones are on the net and you > don't need a gateway to the POTS service, why should you spend > anything over the cost of your connectivity? This already happens between VoIP customers (in most cases it goes through the VoIP company's servers first, but it doesn't need to touch the POTS network) The main issue with direct user to user VoIP calls is maintaining a phone number <--> IP database. FWD is one option, but unfortunately it's not supported widely enough to be useful yet. ------------------------------ From: Tony P. Subject: Re: Connecting VoIP Device to Home Wiring Organization: ATCC Date: Wed, 8 Dec 2004 18:28:28 -0500 In article , rlangly@gmail.com says: > Hi all, > I'm a subscriber of Packet8, and on their VoIP box it says not to > connect it to the home wiring in my home. I'm assuming they get folks > who connect it without unplugging the Ma Bell line and this blows the > box. If I disconnect the outside lines (no voltage on phonelines) is > there any reason not to connect the VoIP box to make all my phones > hot? I only have three phones throughout the house, and I've been > told such a box like this should put out enough voltage to carry such > a load. Just curious -- Thanks, > Ringo > [TELECOM Digest Editor's Note: As long as you *disconnect everything* > pertaining to Bell first, you should be okay. PAT] Just disconnect and clip the little RJ11 plug at the NID. Tag it as private circuit, do not touch under penalty of law. ------------------------------ From: DevilsPGD Subject: Re: Lycos Pulls Anti-Spam 'Vigilante' Campaign Date: Wed, 08 Dec 2004 16:00:26 -0700 Organization: Posted via Supernews, http://www.supernews.com In message Rick Merrill wrote: >> "I find the anti-spam downloadable DDoS tool to be without a doubt >> irresponsible, possibly illegal, > Illegal? Right, and enforced by the international "internet police"? Most countries have laws that can be stretched to cover denial of service attacks, especially against a business' website. There are a number of potential issues, a big one being that you might take down a website on the same server as the spammer. That business has likely done nothing wrong (legally), and would have a cause of action against anyone supporting the DDoS. ------------------------------ From: Peter Brooks Subject: Re: Western Electric and Al Capone Date: Wed, 08 Dec 2004 23:19:41 -0500 Small correction: the folks portrayed in "The Eudaemonic Pie", Doyne Farmer, Norm Packard, et. al. were not successful ultimately in beating roulette for purely technological reasons (some devices didn't work properly). On Tue, 07 Dec 2004 17:36:33 GMT, haynes@alumni.uark.edu (Jim Haynes) wrote: > (Compare with the much later activities of some college students > documented in the book, "Eudaemonic Pie". They used computers in > briefcases and radios in their shoes in a successful scheme to predict > the behavior of a roulette wheel.) > jhhaynes at earthlink dot net ------------------------------ TELECOM Digest is an electronic journal devoted mostly but not exclusively to telecommunications topics. It is circulated anywhere there is email, in addition to various telecom forums on a variety of networks such as Compuserve and America On Line, Yahoo Groups, and other forums. It is also gatewayed to Usenet where it appears as the moderated newsgroup 'comp.dcom.telecom'. TELECOM Digest is a not-for-profit, mostly non-commercial educational service offered to the Internet by Patrick Townson. All the contents of the Digest are compilation-copyrighted. You may reprint articles in some other media on an occasional basis, but please attribute my work and that of the original author. Contact information: Patrick Townson/TELECOM Digest Post Office Box 50 Independence, KS 67301 Phone: 620-402-0134 Fax 1: 775-255-9970 Fax 2: 530-309-7234 Fax 3: 208-692-5145 Email: editor@telecom-digest.org Subscribe: telecom-subscribe@telecom-digest.org Unsubscribe:telecom-unsubscribe@telecom-digest.org This Digest is the oldest continuing e-journal about telecomm- unications on the Internet, having been founded in August, 1981 and published continuously since then. Our archives are available for your review/research. We believe we are the oldest e-zine/mailing list on the internet in any category! URL information: http://telecom-digest.org Anonymous FTP: mirror.lcs.mit.edu/telecom-archives/archives/ (or use our mirror site: ftp.epix.net/pub/telecom-archives) Email <==> FTP: telecom-archives@telecom-digest.org Send a simple, one line note to that automated address for a help file on how to use the automatic retrieval system for archives files. You can get desired files in email. ************************************************************************* * TELECOM Digest is partially funded by a grant from * * Judith Oppenheimer, President of ICB Inc. and purveyor of accurate * * 800 & Dot Com News, Intelligence, Analysis, and Consulting. * * http://ICBTollFree.com, http://1800TheExpert.com * * Views expressed herein should not be construed as representing * * views of Judith Oppenheimer or ICB Inc. * ************************************************************************* ICB Toll Free News. Contact information is not sold, rented or leased. One click a day feeds a person a meal. Go to http://www.thehungersite.com Copyright 2004 ICB, Inc. and TELECOM Digest. All rights reserved. Our attorney is Bill Levant, of Blue Bell, PA. ************************ DIRECTORY ASSISTANCE JUST 65 CENTS ONE OR TWO INQUIRIES CHARGED TO YOUR CREDIT CARD! REAL TIME, UP TO DATE! SPONSORED BY TELECOM DIGEST AND EASY411.COM SIGN UP AT http://www.easy411.com/telecomdigest ! ************************ --------------------------------------------------------------- Finally, the Digest is funded by gifts from generous readers such as yourself who provide funding in amounts deemed appropriate. Your help is important and appreciated. A suggested donation of fifty dollars per year per reader is considered appropriate. See our address above. Please make at least a single donation to cover the cost of processing your name to the mailing list. All opinions expressed herein are deemed to be those of the author. Any organizations listed are for identification purposes only and messages should not be considered any official expression by the organization. End of TELECOM Digest V23 #587 ****************************** From editor@telecom-digest.org Thu Dec 9 19:10:05 2004 Received: (from ptownson@localhost) by massis.lcs.mit.edu (8.11.6p3/8.11.6) id iBA0A5627928; Thu, 9 Dec 2004 19:10:05 -0500 (EST) Date: Thu, 9 Dec 2004 19:10:05 -0500 (EST) From: editor@telecom-digest.org Message-Id: <200412100010.iBA0A5627928@massis.lcs.mit.edu> X-Authentication-Warning: massis.lcs.mit.edu: ptownson set sender to editor@telecom-digest.org using -f To: ptownson Approved: patsnewlist Subject: TELECOM Digest V23 #588 TELECOM Digest Thu, 9 Dec 2004 19:10:00 EST Volume 23 : Issue 588 Inside This Issue: Editor: Patrick A. Townson T-Mobile USA Launches CallerTunes - First Nationwide (Monty Solomon) Online Research Worries Many Educators (Monty Solomon) Motorola Aims For TiVo Crowd/Comcast Customers Get New Cable (M Solomon) Avantel Mexico Selects SmartNode VoIP Gateway Routers (Chris) Information Needed on Wi-Fi (DVB) Senate Passes H.R. 5419 (Telecom dailyLead from USTA) Partner Mail (release 3) Simultaneous Ring (underpress) Data Mining Conference: Solving Real World Challenges,March 2005 (lisas) Re: Dropping SBC For a VoIP Solution - Vonage or Packet8 (Ringo Langly) Re: Dropping SBC For a VoIP Solution - Vonage or Packet8 (Isaiah Beard) Re: Radar Detectors (Tim@Backhome.org) Re: Radar Detectors (jmeissen@aracnet.com) Re: Connecting VoIP Device to Home Wiring (Ringo Langly) Re: I Want to Block Anonymous/Name Unavailable/Unwanted Calls (Ken) Re: Treo650 v Blackberry (Isaiah Beard) Re: Calling Card Needed -- Short Interaction Sequence (Edward Gehringer) Vonage, VoicePulse Push Forward With Video (Lisa Minter) Telecom and VOIP (Voice over Internet Protocol) Digest for the Internet. All contents here are copyrighted by Patrick Townson and the individual writers/correspondents. Articles may be used in other journals or newsgroups, provided the writer's name and the Digest are included in the fair use quote. By using -any name or email address- included herein for -any- reason other than responding to an article herein, you agree to pay a hundred dollars to the recipients of the email. =========================== Addresses herein are not to be added to any mailing list, nor to be sold or given away without explicit written consent. Chain letters, viruses, porn, spam, and miscellaneous junk are definitely unwelcome. We must fight spam for the same reason we fight crime: not because we are naive enough to believe that we will ever stamp it out, but because we do not want the kind of world that results when no one stands against crime. Geoffrey Welsh =========================== See the bottom of this issue for subscription and archive details and the name of our lawyer; other stuff of interest. ---------------------------------------------------------------------- Date: Thu, 9 Dec 2004 08:16:28 -0500 From: Monty Solomon Subject: T-Mobile USA Launches CallerTunes - the First Nationwide T-Mobile USA Launches CallerTunes -- the First Nationwide Ringback Tone Service That Lets Users 'Represent Their Style' BELLEVUE, Wash.--(BUSINESS WIRE)--Dec. 8, 2004-- Initial Trial Offer Gives 30 Days Use of the Innovative Service, and Alicia Keys Bonus CallerTune "Karma" At No Extra Charge T-Mobile USA subscribers across the country now can ditch the dull switchboard ring that their callers hear, in favor of a tune that represents their unique style, with the launch today of T-Mobile's ringback tone service -- CallerTunes(TM). T-Mobile is the first company to launch a ringback tone service nationwide. If you use ringtones, your wireless phone 'rings' with your favorite song or other audio clip when someone is calling. That's great for you, of course, but the people calling you still hear the old, dull ring until you answer the phone. Now that has changed. As a CallerTunes subscriber, you can select audio clips for the people calling you to hear before you answer the phone -- whether it's for specific individuals, groups of friends, or at specific times of the day -- giving you hundreds of ways to represent your style. - http://finance.lycos.com/home/news/story.asp?story=45495352 ------------------------------ Date: Thu, 9 Dec 2004 08:31:31 -0500 From: Monty Solomon Subject: Online Research Worries Many Educators By ANICK JESDANUN AP Internet Writer NEW YORK (AP) -- Go to Google, search and scroll results, click and copy. When students do research online these days, many educators worry, those are often about the only steps they take. If they can avoid a trip to the library at all, many students gladly will. Young people may know that just because information is plentiful online doesn't mean it's reliable, yet their perceptions of what's trustworthy frequently differ from their elders' _ sparking a larger debate about what constitutes truth in the Internet age. Georgia Tech professor Amy Bruckman tried to force students to leave their computers by requiring at least one book for a September class project. She wasn't prepared for the response: "Someone raised their hand and asked, "Excuse me, where would I get a book?'" While the answer might just have been a smart aleck's bid for laughs, Bruckman and other educators grapple daily with the challenge of ensuring their students have good skills for discerning the truth. Professors and librarians say many come to college without any such skills, and quite a few leave without having acquired them. - http://finance.lycos.com/home/news/story.asp?story=45500939 [TELECOM Digest Editor's Note: The argument about 'computers versus real books' seems to me to be just a re-hash of the argument a few years ago about why 'computers are used for invasions of privacy, instructions for building bombs, pornography, inappropriate inform- ation for kids, etc' but libraries are where kids should be going. I *thought* we had resolved that one by pointing out that there is absolutely *nothing* you can learn from a computer that you could not learn from a library as well; the entire difference being the speed and ease of the learning process. We did NOT start suddenly aquiring the wisdom of the world with the invention of the computer and later the internet. The computer and internet are simply tools to use in your learning experience. The 'information explosion' did not begin with computers; it started in the fifteenth century with the invention by Guttenberg of a printing machine out of old wine skins. So what are these people complaining about, that the tools for learning have been improved? It is true that computers have hastened the 'information explosion', but who is to be blamed for that, Bill Gates, or the parents whose children use computers instead of *at the very least* know the 'old fashioned' techniques for learning? PAT] ------------------------------ Date: Thu, 9 Dec 2004 17:25:44 -0500 From: Monty Solomon Subject: Motorola Aims For TiVo Crowd/Comcast Customers Get New Cable Box Motorola aims for TiVo crowd Comcast customers get new cable box with VCR powers By Mike Hughlett Tribune staff reporter The television set-top box -- that ungainly contraption needed to watch cable TV -- will never be a sexy product. But it is getting a makeover that is helping to boost sales for Motorola Inc. The new boxes, which are being introduced across the Chicago area for Comcast cable customers, can record television shows much like a VCR. The boxes can also store hours and hours of shows on a built-in hard drive. The digital video recorder technology, pioneered by TiVo, has caught the fancy of consumers who want to save a season's worth of episodes for a favorite TV show or simply record one show while watching another. Motorola and Georgia-based Scientific-Atlanta are the dominant providers of set-top boxes. And their cable customers are starting to flex their muscles on DVR technology and eat into TiVo's market share. Satellite television remains a TiVo stronghold. But cable television is a bigger market. Comcast, Motorola's biggest customer and the nation's largest cable TV operator, is in the midst of a massive DVR rollout. http://www.chicagotribune.com/technology/chi-0412080367dec08,1,419411.story ------------------------------ From: Chris Subject: Avantel Mexico Selects SmartNode VoIP Gateway Routers Date: 9 Dec 2004 08:26:43 -0800 Mexico's Premier IP Carrier Deploys Patton SmartNode(tm) as Their Chosen Voice-over-IP Gateway for Bundled Voice and Data Services For Immediate Release GAITHERSBURG, Maryland - Patton Electronics--an industry leader in access, connectivity and VoIP--announces today that Avantel has selected Patton's SmartNode(tm) as the customer-premise VoIP solution for their PYME Plus IP-based telephone services targeting small and mid-sized enterprises. Avantel, "The IP Company" (La Compa=F1=EDa IP), is Mexico's premier communications service and second-largest long-distance carrier, as well as providing local phone service. Avantel's new PYME Plus service package offers dedicated Internet access bundled with local, long distance, and mobile-cellular minutes plus 800 phone numbers-all for about 40% less than those combined services would typically cost. Patton's SmartNode(tm) Modular VoIP Access Router combines a Voice-over-IP gateway and a secure QoS router in a single low-cost modular device. The powerful combination enables Avantel to reduce operating costs while delivering the high-quality integrated voice and data services their business customers need most-at a price they can afford. "Patton offered Avantel the key value proposition of SmartNode(tm)- namely, the ability to deploy services with a fully-integrated CPE solution that includes both the Router and the VoIP Gateway" said Armando Morillo, Patton's Sales Director for Latin America. "Patton plays well with others," said Antonio Torre, Product Marketing Manager for Avantel. "Avantel was looking for a reliable and responsive VoIP vendor. Patton's SmartNode is flexible and reasonably priced. It connects seamlessly with Avantel's network platforms and protocols. Plus, the support Patton has provided is one of the best in the market- before, during and after the sale. Patton has proved to be a true business partner, ready and able to adapt, quick to customize...making sure their solutions work well in our network and for our customers." Avantel has deployed hundreds of Patton's SmartNode Model 2300 VoIP Gateway Routers at customer sites during the initial roll-out of their IP-based SOHO services. "IP has become the new foundation for all communications. It's not just for web surfing anymore," said Scott Whittle, Patton's Director of Product Management. "Avantel is an industry innovator with the right focus on all IP-based services. We count it a privilege to launch this long-term partnership with such a quality-focused service provider." "Patton is pleased," Mr. Whittle continued, "to combine our advanced Voice-over-IP technology with Avantel's high-value services to deliver integrated voice and data communications for businesses throughout Mexico." About the SmartNode(tm) family of VoIP Gateway Routers The SmartNode(tm) family of VoIP gateways and routers offer compact-desktop and modular voice/data IAD solutions for service providers and enterprises. The SmartNode 1000 and 4520 series SOHO and branch office IADs support one or two ISDN BRI So ports or 2-8 analog ports as well as a full-featured QoS VPN Router. The modular 19" SmartNode 2300 series are designed for medium and large enterprise applications featuring on-board LAN and WAN interfaces and a range of PMC based voice interface cards/expansion modules. Interface cards provide flexible port configurations for ISDN, T1, E1, PRI, BRI and FXS. The SmartNode 2400 series supports up to 96/120 Voice-over-IP connections in a single 1U 19" chassis. About Avantel Avantel "The IP Company" solutions in Mexico, offers a wide portfolio of telecommunications services especially tailored to meet the diverse needs of companies of all sizes and sectors, from intelligent voice and data transmission to virtual private networks (VPNs), integrated telecommunications packages and managed services. Avantel's network, the country's second largest, is the best positioned to provide IP-based solutions. Its Data Centers, directly connected to its backbone, allow it to provide robust, reliable Internet access and server hosting as well as network design and management. About Patton Patton Electronics Company is a US manufacturer and marketer of data communications products, including VoIP/ToIP gateways & routers, Remote Access (V.92, V.90, K56Flex, V.34+, and ISDN dial-in), Last Mile/Local Loop Access (T1, E1, and xDSL modems, NTUs and CSU/DSUs), Multi-Service Access (voice, intranet, extranet, and Frame Relay access), and Connectivity (interface converters, short range modems, multiplexers, and surge protectors). For more information or to request a free datacom catalog, please contact sales@patton.com. Patton Electronics Company 7622 Rickenbacker Drive Gaithersburg, MD 20879 USA Tel: +1 301.975.1000 Fax: +1 301.869.9293 Email: marketing@patton.com Web: http://www.patton.com/ ------------------------------ From: mykonosboy@tiscali.it (DVB) Subject: Information Wanted on WI-FI Date: 9 Dec 2004 12:47:03 -0800 Organization: http://groups.google.com Hi, I have a PC with tecnology Centrino (Intel Pro/Wireless 2100 WLAN 802.11b,11Mbps). I'm going for holiday in Mexico in an hotel that provides a connection to internet through a modem called ALAMBRICO. I've never heard about this router, in Italy nobody knows what it is. Do you know if I can use my laptop to connect to internet in the hotel? Best regards, MYK ------------------------------ Date: Thu, 9 Dec 2004 13:49:39 EST From: Telecom dailyLead from USTA Subject: Senate Passes H.R. 5419 http://www.dailylead.com/latestIssue.jsp?i=18012&l=2017006 TODAY'S HEADLINES NEWS OF THE DAY * Senate passes H.R. 5419 BUSINESS & INDUSTRY WATCH * DSL deployment up 39% in first three quarters of 2004 * Qwest expands enterprise VoIP service * Report: 1.5 billion mobile phone users worldwide * Cable companies have eye on cellular services * AT&T, MCI may be acquisition targets * Nortel revises net income projection as earnings restatement nears USTA SPOTLIGHT * USTA applauds Senate passage of funding bill for schools and libraries EMERGING TECHNOLOGIES * Vonage to launch videophones REGULATORY & LEGISLATIVE * Franchise requirements an issue for telcos' TV plans http://www.dailylead.com/latestIssue.jsp?i=18012&l=2017006 Legal and Privacy information at http://www.dailylead.com/about/privacy_legal.jsp SmartBrief, Inc. 1100 H ST NW, Suite 1000 Washington, DC 20005 ------------------------------ From: underpress Subject: Partner Mail (Release 3) Simultaneous Ring Date: 9 Dec 2004 08:02:16 -0800 Organization: http://groups.google.com Hi, I'm a (computer) sys admin having to deal with the phones for the first time ... not having fun! I want incoming calls to ring 5 extensions simultaneously. I've created a Group List containing the five extensions, but I can't figure out how to get the incoming lines to ring that group. Help! And thanks. Trevor ------------------------------ From: lisas@salford-systems.com Subject: Data Mining Conference: Solving Real World Challenges, NYC, March Date: 9 Dec 2004 05:57:33 -0800 Salford Systems Data Mining 2005 New York, March 28-30, 2005 Focusing on the Contributions of Data Mining to Solving Real World Challenges Honoring the Real-World Experiences of Data Mining Visionaries Leo Breiman and Jerome Friedman CONFERENCE PROGRAM http://www.salforddatamining.com/program.htm TELECOMMUNICATION SESSIONS: An Out-of-Memory Implementation of the PRIM Procedure for Massive Datasets: Telecommunications Dataset David Poole, AT&T Labs - Research Winning With TreeNet: The Duke/NCR Teradata Churn Modeling Tournament, Telecommunications Dataset Mikhail Golovnya, Salford Systems TRACKS: Data Mining Issues and Implementation Real World Success Stories: Business Real World Success Stories: Biomedical Real World Success Stories: Environmental Novel Methodologies POST-CONFERENCE HANDS-ON TRAINING Network with Data Mining Experts and Pick up Pointers from Companies, Research Centers and Laboratories Including: The International Monetary Fund, American Express, Barnes and Noble, Visa, Pfizer, Union Bank, Wells Fargo Bank, Ciphergen, Stanford Linear Accelerator, Johns Hopkins Medical School and the University of California at Berkeley. If you have an interest in attending this conference or the post-conference training, please contact Lisa Solomon: Phone: 619-543-8880 x14, Email: lisas@salforddatamining.com ------------------------------ From: Ringo Langly Subject: Re: Dropping SBC For a VoIP Solution -- Vonage or Packet8 ?? Date: 9 Dec 2004 04:59:54 -0800 Organization: http://groups.google.com Hi Rick, I guess I don't understand ... the Telephone Adapter (DTA310 in my case) has one RJ45 connector plus my ISP only allows one public IP address. If I connect the Telephone Adapter to my cable modem first then it will get the public IP address -- not my router, which will leave my network without Internet access. I appriciate the suggestion, but either I've missed something or you're mistaken. The only way to connect (unless I had two IP addresses from my ISP) is the way it is currently connected: Cablemodem >> Router >> Telephone Adapter / Computers If I'm mistaken, please enlighten me ... Ringo [TELECOM Digest Editor's Note: Depending on the kind of TA you are using, many of them now have a 'bypass' allowing the TA to go immediatly behind the cablemodem, then 'bypassing' out to the router and computers. That is my setup here with my Linksys TA (which replaced the Motorola TA I was using from Vonage.) So you probably need to 'register' the TA with your cable internet provider (as I had to do) but then the Cable provider just looks at the TA as 'just one more computer' (or depending on how much of a firewall it has) as the 'computer' at your IP address. PAT] ------------------------------ From: Isaiah Beard Subject: Re: Dropping SBC For a VoIP Solution -- Vonage or Packet8 ?? Date: Thu, 09 Dec 2004 15:13:16 -0500 Rick Merrill wrote: >> One feature I tried that didn't work well was the call forwarding. I >> forwarded the line to my work number, called my house, and within a >> couple of rings my work phone rang. The delay was (no kidding) 2-3 >> seconds. Total pipe-organ effect, which makes this feature useless >> for me. > You wired it up wrong, and I'll try to say why. It should be > Modem<>TelephoneAdapter<>Router<>PC Uhh, that doesn't work for Packet8, I'm afraid. The Packet8 ATA is specifically meant to plug in behind the router. See page 2 of this document to see what I'm talking about: http://www.packet8.net/support/faqs/docs/quickstartguide_frontback_final_ctm.pdf If YOU have a DTA310, and have managed to install it in the setup you've described, I'd like to know how you managed it. :) FWIW though, I have Packet8 and have not run into the lag problem. there is a small amount of lag, but it's equivalent to the lag you experience on a cell phone, about .25 to .5 seconds. Not enough to be noticeable in conversation. E-mail fudged to thwart spammers. Transpose the c's and a's in my e-mail address to reply. ------------------------------ From: Tim@Backhome.org Subject: Re: Radar Detectors Date: Thu, 09 Dec 2004 05:27:31 -0800 Organization: Cox Communications Bitu wrote: > I have tested the spray myself. I triggered one of these nasty cameras > intentionally one early morning when there was nobody around. I saw the > flash go off but I have yet to receive any tickets. It is a nice > feeling to know that I am not driving naked. These cameras are not for > safety they are all about revenue. I have donated enough money to the > local police department. They are not going to get me again for driving > 5 miles over the speed limit. The automatic devices for slight speed violations are revenue devices for the most part. But, the devices that catch red light runners serve a genuine safety purposes. In Southern California there just aren't enough traffic cops. And, side collisions at intersections because one car ran the red light is about the leading cause of traffic deaths in the region these days. ------------------------------ From: jmeissen@aracnet.com Subject: Re: Radar Detectors Date: 9 Dec 2004 15:43:29 GMT Organization: http://extra.newsguy.com In article , Bitu wrote: >> But thank God there is another solution for this. It is >> called PhotoBlocker Spray. > I have been using it for two years. Two years ago I was getting > photo-radar tickets every three months. Then I saw a FOX News report > that showed how well this PHOTOBLOCKER spray worked. It showed Denver > police Department testing it and cops actually called it surprisingly > effective. Interesting. I watched a local FOX news report that showed that they didn't work at all, and during an interview the local distributor admitted it. The real solution is to not drive in a manner that precipitates a ticket in the first place. John Meissen jmeissen@aracnet.com ------------------------------ From: Ringo Langly Subject: Re: Connecting VoIP Device to Home Wiring Date: 9 Dec 2004 04:29:20 -0800 Organization: http://groups.google.com William Warren wrote: > On 7 Dec 2004 11:24:11 -0800, Ringo Langly wrote: >> Hi all, >> I'm a subscriber of Packet8, and on their VoIP box it says not to >> connect it to the home wiring in my home. I'm assuming they get >> folks who connect it without unplugging the Ma Bell line and this >> blows the box. If I disconnect the outside lines (no voltage on >> phonelines) is there any reason not to connect the VoIP box to make >> all my phones hot? I only have three phones throughout the house, >> and I've been told such a box like this should put out enough >> voltage to carry such a load. Just curious -- Thanks, >> Ringo >> [TELECOM Digest Editor's Note: As long as you *disconnect >> everything* pertaining to Bell first, you should be okay. PAT] > Ringo, > Make sure you _really_ disconnect EVERYTHING: there may be old > transformers on the wires from a Princess phone. > You'll also need to check if your burglar alarm and/or utility meter > is hooked to the line: they'll need to be reprogrammed if your > dialing pattern is different. > And _please_ take the time to update the E911 records. The life you > save may be your own! > FWIW. > William > (Filter noise from my address for direct replies) Hi William, The house is 20 years old, but AFAIK there's no other connection going to the line other then the outside phone box. I'll put a volt meter on the line just to be sure nothing else is supplying juice to it, but I don't know of anything else that could be. As for everything else, I do have E911 activated and updated via Packet8 (paying extra $3 for it), plus I have no burgler alarm or anything else that should tap into the phoneline. Thanks for the info and take care, Ringo ------------------------------ From: Ken@PrivacyCorps.com Subject: Re: I Want to Block Anonymous/Name Unavailable/Unwanted Calls Date: 9 Dec 2004 10:05:36 -0800 Organization: http://groups.google.com Your prayers have been answered. Recently introduced on http://www.PrivacyCorps.com is the Caller ID Manager http://www.privacycorps.com/products/?id=20. With the single touch of a button, all Anonymous, Out of Area, Private, 000-000-0000 numbers can be blocked, before they ring your phone. And this is all accomplished without the associated monthly fees from the phone company services like Anonymous Call Rejection or Call Blocking. Only Caller ID service is required from your telephone service provider. Additionally, up to 175 entries can be saved to either ignore the call without being answered or ringing the phone, route directly to your answering device without ringing the phone, ring specific phones or all phones. A 'Wildcard' feature is available to block entire area codes, prefixes or number sets. For those who desire even more privacy, the Caller ID Manager can be set to keep all callers from ringing your phone, while allowing unimpeded access to only welcome callers on your 'Invited' list. Based on the same platform, the FAX FIREWALL http://www.privacycorps.com/products/?id=23 is used to stop junk faxes using the same methods. For further information, please feel free to contact our customer service department 9AM-5PM PST, M-F. Ken Privacy Corps www.PrivacyCorps.com 888 633 5777 ------------------------------ From: Isaiah Beard Subject: Re: Treo650 v Blackberry Date: Thu, 09 Dec 2004 14:58:42 -0500 Mark wrote: > Has anyone done an investigation as to the specific features and > benefits of each of these devices. Ultimately they seem similar in > almost every way. One thing that I really don't understand is the > email. How does the treo work v the blackberry. Blackberry is more a push-type of interface whereas the Treo is not (though can emulate quite well). I will also say that Palm OS has a much broader userbase and more software has been written for it than Blackberry. > I heard rumors that for the treo to work your computer must be on, and > it must be forwarding your messages to versamail. Is this true. No. Your computer needs to be on only if you are using Sprint PCS Business Connection, *NOT* VersaMail. VersaMail is a standalone e-mail client that can work independently of your desktop computer. > How does the blackberry work instead? Any information will be > greatly appreciated. A blackberry can also work in the same way as a Treo. Either standalone -- checking your e-mail account independently, or through the use of an exchange server running on a desktop. E-mail fudged to thwart spammers. Transpose the c's and a's in my e-mail address to reply. ------------------------------ From: Dr. Edward F Gehringer Subject: Re: Calling Card Needed -- Short Interaction Sequence Date: Thu, 09 Dec 2004 16:38:57 -0500 Organization: NC State University > The OfficeMax 1000 minute cards run 0.03/minute on sale, which is > usually every other week. They are served by IDT and allow dial > through the recorded prompt/advert messages. I bought this card and used it on a trip. Unfortunately, while you can dial through messages, the message about the charge for calls from a payphone does not come on until *after* you dial the last digit of the phone number, so it cannot be bypassed. And even worse, although the card states, "Payphone surcharge of 13 US minutes" (which would be 39 cents) the recorded announcement says that the charge will be 99 cents! So it seems that we have a case of downright consumer fraud on these OfficeMax/IDT cards. And again I ask, Why is it so hard to get information on the real price of calls made with these cards? We have expiration dates, per-month charges, payphone charges, and perhaps other fees in addition to the advertised rate. It is hard to learn how much these fees are, and even when the consumer is told, the information may be incorrect. This reminds me of the car-rental industry, where the actual charge may be up to 40% greater than advertised, preventing effective price competition. -Ed ------------------------------ From: Lisa Minter Date: Thu, 09 Dec 2004 14:10:07 -0500 Subject: Vonage, VoicePulse Push Forward With Video http://voxilla.com/voxstory128.html By PHILLIP BRITT for VOXILLA.COM Within the space of a few hours, two separate New Jersey-based Voice over Internet Protocol providers announced their intention to move forcefully into relatively uncharted space: the video telephone. First, Edison, N.J.-based Vonage Holdings Corp announced that the company had struck an agreement with video telephone manufacturer Viseon to provide video services, asking that the news be embargoed until Thursday. A few hours later, Jamesburg, N.J.-based VoIP provider Voice Pulse issued a press release announcing it would be incorporating video service into its offerings in the second half of 2005. The twin announcements are not coincidental. According to Ravi Sakaria, CEO of VoicePulse, his company decided to disclose its video service soon after he received a call from a reporter at the Bergen Record, a newspaper in northern New Jersey. "We built our network for video from Day 1 and we'd been getting ready to announce it for a while," said Sakaria. "So when I got the call from the reporter, we decided to move ahead with the announcement." Full story at: http://voxilla.com/voxstory128.html ------------------------------ TELECOM Digest is an electronic journal devoted mostly but not exclusively to telecommunications topics. It is circulated anywhere there is email, in addition to various telecom forums on a variety of networks such as Compuserve and America On Line, Yahoo Groups, and other forums. It is also gatewayed to Usenet where it appears as the moderated newsgroup 'comp.dcom.telecom'. TELECOM Digest is a not-for-profit, mostly non-commercial educational service offered to the Internet by Patrick Townson. All the contents of the Digest are compilation-copyrighted. You may reprint articles in some other media on an occasional basis, but please attribute my work and that of the original author. Contact information: Patrick Townson/TELECOM Digest Post Office Box 50 Independence, KS 67301 Phone: 620-402-0134 Fax 1: 775-255-9970 Fax 2: 530-309-7234 Fax 3: 208-692-5145 Email: editor@telecom-digest.org Subscribe: telecom-subscribe@telecom-digest.org Unsubscribe:telecom-unsubscribe@telecom-digest.org This Digest is the oldest continuing e-journal about telecomm- unications on the Internet, having been founded in August, 1981 and published continuously since then. Our archives are available for your review/research. We believe we are the oldest e-zine/mailing list on the internet in any category! URL information: http://telecom-digest.org Anonymous FTP: mirror.lcs.mit.edu/telecom-archives/archives/ (or use our mirror site: ftp.epix.net/pub/telecom-archives) Email <==> FTP: telecom-archives@telecom-digest.org Send a simple, one line note to that automated address for a help file on how to use the automatic retrieval system for archives files. You can get desired files in email. ************************************************************************* * TELECOM Digest is partially funded by a grant from * * Judith Oppenheimer, President of ICB Inc. and purveyor of accurate * * 800 & Dot Com News, Intelligence, Analysis, and Consulting. * * http://ICBTollFree.com, http://1800TheExpert.com * * Views expressed herein should not be construed as representing * * views of Judith Oppenheimer or ICB Inc. * ************************************************************************* ICB Toll Free News. Contact information is not sold, rented or leased. One click a day feeds a person a meal. Go to http://www.thehungersite.com Copyright 2004 ICB, Inc. and TELECOM Digest. All rights reserved. Our attorney is Bill Levant, of Blue Bell, PA. ************************ DIRECTORY ASSISTANCE JUST 65 CENTS ONE OR TWO INQUIRIES CHARGED TO YOUR CREDIT CARD! REAL TIME, UP TO DATE! SPONSORED BY TELECOM DIGEST AND EASY411.COM SIGN UP AT http://www.easy411.com/telecomdigest ! ************************ --------------------------------------------------------------- Finally, the Digest is funded by gifts from generous readers such as yourself who provide funding in amounts deemed appropriate. Your help is important and appreciated. A suggested donation of fifty dollars per year per reader is considered appropriate. See our address above. Please make at least a single donation to cover the cost of processing your name to the mailing list. All opinions expressed herein are deemed to be those of the author. Any organizations listed are for identification purposes only and messages should not be considered any official expression by the organization. End of TELECOM Digest V23 #588 ****************************** From editor@telecom-digest.org Fri Dec 10 00:21:38 2004 Received: (from ptownson@localhost) by massis.lcs.mit.edu (8.11.6p3/8.11.6) id iBA5Lb401348; Fri, 10 Dec 2004 00:21:38 -0500 (EST) Date: Fri, 10 Dec 2004 00:21:38 -0500 (EST) From: editor@telecom-digest.org Message-Id: <200412100521.iBA5Lb401348@massis.lcs.mit.edu> X-Authentication-Warning: massis.lcs.mit.edu: ptownson set sender to editor@telecom-digest.org using -f To: ptownson Approved: patsnewlist Subject: TELECOM Digest V23 #589 TELECOM Digest Fri, 10 Dec 2004 00:22:00 EST Volume 23 : Issue 589 Inside This Issue: Editor: Patrick A. Townson Kazaa Talked to Record Firms About Music Swaps (Lisa Minter) Coming Soon to an Inbox Near You: 'Spiritual Spam' (Lisa Minter) EU Wants to Make Internet Safe for Children (Lisa Minter) Re: Calling Card Needed -- Short Interaction Sequence (DevilsPGD) Re: Vonage, VoicePulse Push Forward With Video (DevilsPGD) Re: Digital PhishNet Launched To Combat Phishing Scams (John Stahl) Re: Online Research Worries Many Educators (William Warren) Re: Online Research Worries Many Educators (Ron Chapman) Re: Radar Detectors (Ron Chapman) Great Long Distance Plan (vodkajoe) Telecom and VOIP (Voice over Internet Protocol) Digest for the Internet. All contents here are copyrighted by Patrick Townson and the individual writers/correspondents. Articles may be used in other journals or newsgroups, provided the writer's name and the Digest are included in the fair use quote. By using -any name or email address- included herein for -any- reason other than responding to an article herein, you agree to pay a hundred dollars to the recipients of the email. =========================== Addresses herein are not to be added to any mailing list, nor to be sold or given away without explicit written consent. Chain letters, viruses, porn, spam, and miscellaneous junk are definitely unwelcome. We must fight spam for the same reason we fight crime: not because we are naive enough to believe that we will ever stamp it out, but because we do not want the kind of world that results when no one stands against crime. Geoffrey Welsh =========================== See the bottom of this issue for subscription and archive details and the name of our lawyer; other stuff of interest. ---------------------------------------------------------------------- From: Lisa Minter Subject: Kazaa Talked to Record Firms About Music Swaps Date: Thu, 9 Dec 2004 22:12:28 EST SYDNEY (Reuters) - Kazaa, the world's most popular Internet file-swapping system, told a court on Thursday it was worried about users exchanging unauthorized files and held talks with record companies in the United States about the problem. Thirty record companies from around the world are suing Kazaa's Australian owners and developers, Sharman Networks and Altnet, claiming that file swapping through Kazaa has cost them millions of dollars in lost sales. Philip Morle, Sharman's director of technology, told the federal court in Sydney the Distributed Computing Industry Association had hosted and coordinated a number of discussions between Sharman Networks and various U.S. record companies about the issue of unauthorized file sharing. Sharman says it can count the number of members using its peer-to-peer network but has no control over what its 100 million network users do with its software or what files they swap. The record companies allege Kazaa is responsible for copyright infringement and conspired to harm the record industry by unlawful means. Final evidence in the case is expected to be given on Friday with closing arguments to be presented mid next week. Federal Court Justice Murray Wilcox, who is hearing the case, is not expected to hand down his verdict until early 2005, but has previously said Kazaa would not be ordered to shut down as part of the copyright lawsuit. The case echoes the 2001 shutdown of renegade song-swap service Napster and follows a 2003 court decision in the Netherlands that cleared Kazaa's software of liability for copyright infringement. The music companies taking the court case in Sydney include the local arms of Sony BMG Music Entertainment (BERT.UL), EMI Group Plc and several other Australian firms. Recorded music sales have tumbled in recent years, with global sales down 7.6 percent in 2003 to $32 billion, according to the industry group, International Federation of the Phonographic Industry (IFPI). The IFPI has blamed rampant piracy, along with poor economic conditions and competition from video games and DVDs, for the slump. Supporters of file swapping argue that it can encourage people to buy music by exposing them to a greater range of music. NOTE: For more telecom/internet/networking/computer news from the daily media, check out our feature 'Telecom Digest Extra' each day at http://telecom-digest.org/td-extra . New articles daily. *** FAIR USE NOTICE. This message contains copyrighted material the use of which has not been specifically authorized by the copyright owner. This Internet discussion group is making it available without profit to group members who have expressed a prior interest in receiving the included information in their efforts to advance the understanding of literary, educational, political, and economic issues, for non-profit research and educational purposes only. I believe that this constitutes a 'fair use' of the copyrighted material as provided for in section 107 of the U.S. Copyright Law. If you wish to use this copyrighted material for purposes of your own that go beyond 'fair use,' you must obtain permission from the copyright owner, Reuters News Service. For more information go to: http://www.law.cornell.edu/uscode/17/107.shtml ------------------------------ From: Lisa Minter Subject: Coming Soon to an Inbox Near You: 'Spiritual Spam' Date: Thu, 9 Dec 2004 22:13:23 EST By Paul Majendie LONDON (Reuters) - Internet users praying for salvation from junk mail face a new torment -- "Spiritual Spam." Along with the flood of messages offering everything from mortgages to miracle cures, they are now being asked to repent and pray. "We are seeing more and more of it. It appears to be on the rise," said Martin Lee of e-mail security company MessageLabs. "The God-botherers are using the techniques of the 21st century. It's Spiritual Spam and almost all of it is Christian," he told Reuters. The prayers appear mostly to originate from native English speakers in the United States. "They are very good at hiding where they are. A lot of the stuff is relayed through China," Lee said. He said it is easier to act against the electronic evangelists in Europe than it is in the U.S. "The United States 'Can Spam' Act only applies to commercial e-mail. If you are trying to save their souls, then it is exempt from the U.S. Act. But it is illegal under European Union law because it is unsolicited," Lee said. The spiritual spammers are after souls rather than cash. "These are old-style evangelicals wanting to spread the message," Lee said. In one typical example, recipients are warned: "Eternity is a really long time. If you or someone close to you has not accepted God, please do so today." Then came the prayer: "Deliver me from all my sinful habits. Set me free!" Neil Hammerton, managing director of computer security company Email Systems, said: "This does not come from mass spam companies. It's people with requests they want to put out. He said they use a database of well known e-mail addresses and spam software they can buy for as little as 25 pounds ($48). "They sit at the end of a Broadband connection and send out thousands of e-mails overnight," he told Reuters. But he reckoned that spiritual spam still makes up less than one percent of the unwanted traffic that pours onto the Internet every day. The latest review by Email Systems showed that medical content made up 48 percent of all spam. Next came pornography with 15 percent followed by gambling with 11 percent and mortgages with nine percent. NOTE: For more telecom/internet/networking/computer news from the daily media, check out our feature 'Telecom Digest Extra' each day at http://telecom-digest.org/td-extra . New articles daily. *** FAIR USE NOTICE. This message contains copyrighted material the use of which has not been specifically authorized by the copyright owner. This Internet discussion group is making it available without profit to group members who have expressed a prior interest in receiving the included information in their efforts to advance the understanding of literary, educational, political, and economic issues, for non-profit research and educational purposes only. I believe that this constitutes a 'fair use' of the copyrighted material as provided for in section 107 of the U.S. Copyright Law. If you wish to use this copyrighted material for purposes of your own that go beyond 'fair use,' you must obtain permission from the copyright owner, in this instance Reuters News Service. For more information go to: http://www.law.cornell.edu/uscode/17/107.shtml ------------------------------ From: Lisa Minter Subject: EU Wants to Make Internet Safe for Children Date: Thu, 9 Dec 2004 22:13:24 EST BRUSSELS (Reuters) - The European Union has launched a 45 million euro ($60 million) plan to protect children from pornography and racist sites when they surf the Internet. "Children are using the Internet more and more and can come across dangerous content. It's essential to inform parents what tools they can use," Viviane Reding, the European Information Society and Media Commissioner, told a news conference. Around 60 percent of children regularly surf the Internet in Scandinavia and countries such as Britain, the Netherlands, Estonia and the Czech Republic, data issued by the European Commission on Thursday showed. But most parents are not aware of the potential risks or do not know who to contact when they come across harmful content, Reding said. The four-year EU program follows up a 38 million euro project that led to the creation of "hotlines" where parents could report illegal content found on the Internet. It will increase the number of hotlines, finance technology to filter out pornography and raise awareness among parents and children, though it was not clear if the funds will be distributed to member states or used at the European level. As an example of the project's value, Reding said existing hotlines, active in 18 EU states and Iceland, had helped the police to crack down on pedophile networks. "Last month a tip from the hotline in Spain led to the arrest of 90 people, the largest operation against a pedophile network in the country," she said. ($1=.7528 Euro) NOTE: For more telecom/internet/networking/computer news from the daily media, check out our feature 'Telecom Digest Extra' each day at http://telecom-digest.org/td-extra . New articles daily. *** FAIR USE NOTICE. This message contains copyrighted material the use of which has not been specifically authorized by the copyright owner. This Internet discussion group is making it available without profit to group members who have expressed a prior interest in receiving the included information in their efforts to advance the understanding of literary, educational, political, and economic issues, for non-profit research and educational purposes only. I believe that this constitutes a 'fair use' of the copyrighted material as provided for in section 107 of the U.S. Copyright Law. If you wish to use this copyrighted material for purposes of your own that go beyond 'fair use,' you must obtain permission from the copyright owner, in this instance, Reuters News Service. For more information go to: http://www.law.cornell.edu/uscode/17/107.shtml ------------------------------ From: DevilsPGD Subject: Re: Calling Card Needed -- Short Interaction Sequence Date: Thu, 09 Dec 2004 18:13:32 -0700 Organization: Posted via Supernews, http://www.supernews.com In message Dr. Edward F Gehringer wrote: > And even worse, although the card states, "Payphone surcharge of 13 US > minutes" (which would be 39 cents) the recorded announcement says that > the charge will be 99 cents! How mad would you be if you were quoted 39 cents (on the card itself) and then billed 99 cents? I'm sorry sir, you can't park your van on the diving board. ------------------------------ From: DevilsPGD Subject: Re: Vonage, VoicePulse Push Forward With Video Date: Thu, 09 Dec 2004 18:13:32 -0700 Organization: Posted via Supernews, http://www.supernews.com In message Lisa Minter wrote: > Within the space of a few hours, two separate New Jersey-based Voice > over Internet Protocol providers announced their intention to move > forcefully into relatively uncharted space: the video telephone. Does anybody care? Will anybody actually use it? I'm sorry sir, you can't park your van on the diving board. [TELECOM Digest Editor's Note: I think it will be used for business conferences, etc, like Bell's Picturephone was used. PAT] ------------------------------ Date: Thu, 09 Dec 2004 20:44:27 -0500 From: John Stahl Subject: Digital PhishNet Launched To Combat Phishing Scams The following was reported today in Computerworld email news (see the whole article with the related link below): > Digital PhishNet Launched To Combat Phishing Scams > Several major industry players and law enforcement agencies are > collaborating in a new effort to respond to the rapidly growing > phishing problem Related story at: http://www.computerworld.com/newsletter/0,4902,98153,00.html?nlid=PM It is nice that the new web site for PhishNet (link in story) indicates that a person should report any phishing to their credit card company and also (through a link on the site) to file a complaint with the "Internet Crime Complaint Center". But I have read some real horror stories of what people have to go through to clear up their credit histories after their names, etc. have been "stolen" (phished) which makes me think that these corporations and law enforcement agencies should also make it easier for you to clear up the mess created as well as try to find the perpetrators of the crime! John Stahl Aljon Enterprises Telecom/Data Consultant ------------------------------ Subject: Re: Online Research Worries Many Educators From: William Warren Organization: Church of the Infinite Possibility Date: Fri, 10 Dec 2004 02:18:09 GMT On Thu, 9 Dec 2004 08:31:31 -0500, Monty Solomon wrote: > By ANICK JESDANUN AP Internet Writer [snip] > Young people may know that just because information is plentiful > online doesn't mean it's reliable, yet their perceptions of what's > trustworthy frequently differ from their elders' _ sparking a larger > debate about what constitutes truth in the Internet age. > Georgia Tech professor Amy Bruckman tried to force students to leave > their computers by requiring at least one book for a September class > project.[snip] > ...Bruckman and other educators grapple daily with the challenge of > ensuring their students have good skills for discerning the truth. > Professors and librarians say many come to college without any such > skills, and quite a few leave without having acquired them. > [TELECOM Digest Editor's Note: [snip] > The computer and internet are simply tools to use in > your learning experience. The 'information explosion' did not begin > with computers; it started in the fifteenth century with the invention > by Guttenberg of a printing machine out of old wine skins. So what are > these people complaining about, that the tools for learning have been > improved? It is true that computers have hastened the 'information > explosion', but who is to be blamed for that, Bill Gates, or the > parents whose children use computers instead of *at the very least* > know the 'old fashioned' techniques for learning? PAT] Pat, I don't think Professor Bruckman and her peers are concerned about the "information explosion", but rather about the DISinformation explosion. From such trivial errors as confusing a painter and/or actor named Guttenberg with a goldsmith and inventor named Gutenberg, to corporate doublespeak and government misdirection on a global scale, the Internet is the ultimate example of how speed is the enemy of judgement, of accuracy, of perspective, and of critical thought. The process of manufacturing a book is complicated, expensive, and time-consuming. It costs real money to set type, to manufacture printing plates, to buy paper, to hire expertise, and to transpost the finished product - ALL of which leads, naturally, to very carefull verification of the facts in a manuscript and proofreading of the printer's galleys BEFORE the publication is allowed into the public eye. Not so with electronic media: we are all, after all, part of a distribution system that has "externalized" all but the most trivial costs of publication onto the recipient, and therefore has weakened the need for accuracy, and increased that for speed, to the point where "researchers" can claim successful cold-fusion on the basis of shoddy demonstrations, and a newspaper "reporter" can make up a sensational story out of whole cloth and have it distributed without any independent verification even being considered, let alone implemented. It all comes down to money: if it costs nothing to publish, then mistakes cost nothing too, and college students who assume that the Internet is (or should be) a primary source are making a fundamental mistake. Having said that, I'll add that I do not hold any illusions about the "golden days" of yore: book burnings, lawsuits, and pulp fiction of every variety have been with us as long as moveable type - but having deep pockets means having due regard for the risk of being wrong, and for that reason, books are more reliable sources of information than search engines. Freedom of the press may no longer belong only to the man who owns one, but the responsibilities that accompanied that freedom in Gutenberg's world - the obligation to verify facts, to question poorly thought out reasoning, to demand clarity and responsibility - have been given over to students who are ill-equipped to question, let alone correct, the memes and messages flitting across their screens. This message will self-destruct in Thirty Seconds. William Warren (Filter noise from my address for direct replies) [TELECOM Digest Editor's Note: What you say is true, but with the sheer volume of information (dis- or otherwise) in the search engines you'd think a person searching through it would manage to land on the correct information after sifting through it all. That's not a very good explanation, is it ... :) PAT] ------------------------------ Date: Thu, 9 Dec 2004 23:38:11 -0500 From: Ron Chapman Subject: Re: Online Research Worries Many Educators In article , Monty Solomon wrote: > By ANICK JESDANUN AP Internet Writer > NEW YORK (AP) -- Go to Google, search and scroll results, click and > copy. When students do research online these days, many educators > worry, those are often about the only steps they take. If they can > avoid a trip to the library at all, many students gladly will. > Young people may know that just because information is plentiful > online doesn't mean it's reliable, yet their perceptions of what's > trustworthy frequently differ from their elders' _ sparking a larger > debate about what constitutes truth in the Internet age. > Georgia Tech professor Amy Bruckman tried to force students to leave > their computers by requiring at least one book for a September class > project. > She wasn't prepared for the response: "Someone raised their hand and > asked, "Excuse me, where would I get a book?'" > While the answer might just have been a smart aleck's bid for laughs, > Bruckman and other educators grapple daily with the challenge of > ensuring their students have good skills for discerning the truth. > Professors and librarians say many come to college without any such > skills, and quite a few leave without having acquired them. > - http://finance.lycos.com/home/news/story.asp?story=45500939 > [TELECOM Digest Editor's Note: The argument about 'computers versus > real books' seems to me to be just a re-hash of the argument a few > years ago about why 'computers are used for invasions of privacy, > instructions for building bombs, pornography, inappropriate inform- > ation for kids, etc' but libraries are where kids should be going. > I *thought* we had resolved that one by pointing out that there is > absolutely *nothing* you can learn from a computer that you could not > learn from a library as well; the entire difference being the speed > and ease of the learning process. We did NOT start suddenly aquiring > the wisdom of the world with the invention of the computer and later > the internet. The computer and internet are simply tools to use in > your learning experience. The 'information explosion' did not begin > with computers; it started in the fifteenth century with the invention > by Guttenberg of a printing machine out of old wine skins. So what are > these people complaining about, that the tools for learning have been > improved? It is true that computers have hastened the 'information > explosion', but who is to be blamed for that, Bill Gates, or the > parents whose children use computers instead of *at the very least* > know the 'old fashioned' techniques for learning? PAT] Pat, I don't think the point here was really that they're using computers instead of books. I think the point was that "on the net, no one knows you're a dog." Just because it's written online doesn't mean it's true or relevant. Books, by their very nature, are wrought from processes that distill the crap out and leave hard-considered facts and opinions. But on the net, all it takes is one crazy to set up a "the Holocaust was a fake" blog -- and how does a ten year old know how to interpret that? He doesn't. But he reads it on the net ... so does he just go ahead and use that as "fact" to back up his assignment? It's all about EDITING. Now, maybe if my kid's research was done online using only EDITED resources, resources that have been through the same excruciating processes that produce printed books, that would be fine. But we're too caught up in "gotta have it now, right or wrong" and people write and say ANYTHING just to get it out there. (Calling Mr. Rather, calling Mr. Dan Rather, white courtesy phone ...) Kids need direction -- and the naked net, by itself and without any parental or educational coaching, is NOT the place to send the limited mind of a ten or fifteen year old who doesn't have the tools to understand the nature or context of the information. (Think people who use the net to prey on kids.) Unedited information makes for dangerous waters. It requires at the least parental coaching to help the child become a well-rounded and educated netizen. One should NOT leave the child alone to use the naked net to finish an assignment. My parents could leave me in the library by myself to do that, and I could leave my kid in the library today, but not on the net. Not alone and without guidance. ------------------------------ Date: Thu, 9 Dec 2004 23:42:16 -0500 From: Ron Chapman Subject: Re: Radar Detectors In article , Tim@Backhome.org wrote: > The automatic devices for slight speed violations are revenue devices > for the most part. But, the devices that catch red light runners > serve a genuine safety purposes. Ah. So maybe you can explain to me why cities that employ these devices: (a) pay nothing for them, and receive commissions from the PRIVATE OPERATORS who place them; and (b) change the timing of the lights with such devices, in order to DRAMATICALLY shorten the time of the yellow light, a change which drastically increases the likelihood of your getting caught by the device? By the way, such a change in timing is: (a) NOT within national traffic guidelines, and (b) NOT implemented on traffic lights that DO NOT have such cameras in place. Hmmmmm. Tim, you're wrong. The sole reason for these devices is revenue enhancement. If the lawmakers want to make everything I do illegal, then I guess I'll be a criminal the rest of my life. ------------------------------ From: vodkajoe@yahoo.com Subject: Great Long Distance Date: 9 Dec 2004 20:43:19 -0800 Lightyear Alliance offers the cheapest long distance plan. It's simple. 3.9 cents a minute out-of-state and 9.9 cents a minute in-state. That's cheap than 10-10-220 and others like it. Even better, there's no sign up fee, no minumum usage, and you only pay for what you use. So if you never use it, you'll never get a bill. Interested? Got to / In the bottom right corner under customer, enter 294818 and then select that you want long distance and follow the instructions from there. All you have to do is make one long distance call, you don't even have to talk to anyone. As long as they pick up, it'll be activated. That's it. From there on out you'll have the best long distance available. Enjoy. [TELECOM Digest Editor's Note: The rates you quote are *not* the best I have ever seen. Vonage or other VOIP phones have better rates many times. And with your plan, does Light Year Alliance default your one-plus carrier to them, or do they use some convoluted dialing string (ten or eleven digits, plus a PIN plus the number you wish to call, or ?? Do you get billed on your phone bill or through a credit card, or ?? Your message just seems like any generic long distance plan, which are a dime a dozen these days, all more or less the same price as yours. PAT] ------------------------------ TELECOM Digest is an electronic journal devoted mostly but not exclusively to telecommunications topics. It is circulated anywhere there is email, in addition to various telecom forums on a variety of networks such as Compuserve and America On Line, Yahoo Groups, and other forums. It is also gatewayed to Usenet where it appears as the moderated newsgroup 'comp.dcom.telecom'. TELECOM Digest is a not-for-profit, mostly non-commercial educational service offered to the Internet by Patrick Townson. All the contents of the Digest are compilation-copyrighted. You may reprint articles in some other media on an occasional basis, but please attribute my work and that of the original author. Contact information: Patrick Townson/TELECOM Digest Post Office Box 50 Independence, KS 67301 Phone: 620-402-0134 Fax 1: 775-255-9970 Fax 2: 530-309-7234 Fax 3: 208-692-5145 Email: editor@telecom-digest.org Subscribe: telecom-subscribe@telecom-digest.org Unsubscribe:telecom-unsubscribe@telecom-digest.org This Digest is the oldest continuing e-journal about telecomm- unications on the Internet, having been founded in August, 1981 and published continuously since then. Our archives are available for your review/research. We believe we are the oldest e-zine/mailing list on the internet in any category! URL information: http://telecom-digest.org Anonymous FTP: mirror.lcs.mit.edu/telecom-archives/archives/ (or use our mirror site: ftp.epix.net/pub/telecom-archives) Email <==> FTP: telecom-archives@telecom-digest.org Send a simple, one line note to that automated address for a help file on how to use the automatic retrieval system for archives files. You can get desired files in email. ************************************************************************* * TELECOM Digest is partially funded by a grant from * * Judith Oppenheimer, President of ICB Inc. and purveyor of accurate * * 800 & Dot Com News, Intelligence, Analysis, and Consulting. * * http://ICBTollFree.com, http://1800TheExpert.com * * Views expressed herein should not be construed as representing * * views of Judith Oppenheimer or ICB Inc. * ************************************************************************* ICB Toll Free News. Contact information is not sold, rented or leased. One click a day feeds a person a meal. Go to http://www.thehungersite.com Copyright 2004 ICB, Inc. and TELECOM Digest. All rights reserved. Our attorney is Bill Levant, of Blue Bell, PA. ************************ DIRECTORY ASSISTANCE JUST 65 CENTS ONE OR TWO INQUIRIES CHARGED TO YOUR CREDIT CARD! REAL TIME, UP TO DATE! SPONSORED BY TELECOM DIGEST AND EASY411.COM SIGN UP AT http://www.easy411.com/telecomdigest ! ************************ --------------------------------------------------------------- Finally, the Digest is funded by gifts from generous readers such as yourself who provide funding in amounts deemed appropriate. Your help is important and appreciated. A suggested donation of fifty dollars per year per reader is considered appropriate. See our address above. Please make at least a single donation to cover the cost of processing your name to the mailing list. All opinions expressed herein are deemed to be those of the author. Any organizations listed are for identification purposes only and messages should not be considered any official expression by the organization. End of TELECOM Digest V23 #589 ****************************** From editor@telecom-digest.org Fri Dec 10 20:25:45 2004 Received: (from ptownson@localhost) by massis.lcs.mit.edu (8.11.6p3/8.11.6) id iBB1PiP11637; Fri, 10 Dec 2004 20:25:45 -0500 (EST) Date: Fri, 10 Dec 2004 20:25:45 -0500 (EST) From: editor@telecom-digest.org Message-Id: <200412110125.iBB1PiP11637@massis.lcs.mit.edu> X-Authentication-Warning: massis.lcs.mit.edu: ptownson set sender to editor@telecom-digest.org using -f To: ptownson Approved: patsnewlist Subject: TELECOM Digest V23 #590 TELECOM Digest Fri, 10 Dec 2004 20:26:00 EST Volume 23 : Issue 590 Inside This Issue: Editor: Patrick A. Townson AOL Lays Off 750 Employees (Lisa Minter) Sprint, Nextel in Talks: Reports (Eric Friedebach) Unlimited Calling Plan to India (vijay.vishy@gmail.com) Now, Kudos to Charlie Christ!! Re: NorVergence (David O. Rodriguez) Sprint, Nextel in Merger Talks (Telecom dailyLead from USTA) Packet8 (Bob Kester) Automatic Number Identification (ANI) Service (Michael Quinn) How About Network Protection (Marc) Re: Information Wanted on WI-FI (David Quinton) Re: Radar Detectors (Tim@Backhome.org) Re: Radar Detectors (Justin Time) Re: Radar Detectors (hancock4@bbs.cpcn.com) Re: NASA Van Crash in California Leaves 3 Dead (Henry Cabot Henhouse) Re: Anyone Using Avaya Communication Manager API? (jim.woodward@genesis Re: Question About ROLM PBX Telephones (phoneguide@gmail.com) Re: Online Research Worries Many Educators (Geoffrey Welsh) Re: Dropping SBC For a VoIP Solution - Vonage or Packet8 (Rick Merrill) Telecom and VOIP (Voice over Internet Protocol) Digest for the Internet. All contents here are copyrighted by Patrick Townson and the individual writers/correspondents. Articles may be used in other journals or newsgroups, provided the writer's name and the Digest are included in the fair use quote. By using -any name or email address- included herein for -any- reason other than responding to an article herein, you agree to pay a hundred dollars to the recipients of the email. =========================== Addresses herein are not to be added to any mailing list, nor to be sold or given away without explicit written consent. Chain letters, viruses, porn, spam, and miscellaneous junk are definitely unwelcome. We must fight spam for the same reason we fight crime: not because we are naive enough to believe that we will ever stamp it out, but because we do not want the kind of world that results when no one stands against crime. Geoffrey Welsh =========================== See the bottom of this issue for subscription and archive details and the name of our lawyer; other stuff of interest. ---------------------------------------------------------------------- From: Lisa Minter Subject: AOL Lays Off 750 Employees Date: Fri, 10 Dec 2004 14:16:21 EST by Elizabeth Millard, NewsFactor staff writer Approximately 750 America Online employees, primarily at the company's Dulles, Virginia, headquarters, have been laid off. The cuts were expected by many analysts, since AOL had been suggesting for weeks that it would be realigning the company and shifting some focus areas. "Whenever a company demonstrates that it's going to cut costs, you're probably going to have some job loss," John Challenger, CEO of outplacement firm Challenger, Gray & Christmas, told NewsFactor. The latest round of cuts comes a year after the company's last major layoff round, when 500 employees were let go, mainly from AOL's California offices. The new layoffs involved employees from across the company's operations, but those in the marketing and broadband areas were hit especially hard, according to news reports. No cuts were made in the company's call centers. Employees in Northern Virginia made up the majority of the cuts, but some workers were laid off from offices in Ohio, California and New York. Fresh Strategy AOL has been trying to change its corporate direction for the past two years, when it began to see its dial-up business decline. In response, AOL has noted that it will make up for subscriber loss by focusing more intently on its free AOL.com site, beefing it up with content and games, and hopefully seeing a robust profit from advertising sold on the site. In addition to the push to become a major ad-driven portal, the company has been influenced by SEC scuffles involving its parent company, Time Warner. Tough Times Although AOL's cuts were expected for the past month, they demonstrate that some job loss gloom has not lifted from the technology sector. "Cuts in the sector were expected to increase for the fourth quarter," said Challenger, adding that aggressive price competition for manufacturers, developers and service providers has been hurting job stability. "The most difficult part about these job cuts right now is that they're not being offset by increased hiring," he said. "That means it will be some time before we see a good level of hiring and job creation." NOTE: For more telecom/internet/networking/computer news from the daily media, check out our feature 'Telecom Digest Extra' each day at http://telecom-digest.org/td-extra . New articles daily. *** FAIR USE NOTICE. This message contains copyrighted material the use of which has not been specifically authorized by the copyright owner. This Internet discussion group is making it available without profit to group members who have expressed a prior interest in receiving the included information in their efforts to advance the understanding of literary, educational, political, and economic issues, for non-profit research and educational purposes only. I believe that this constitutes a 'fair use' of the copyrighted material as provided for in section 107 of the U.S. Copyright Law. If you wish to use this copyrighted material for purposes of your own that go beyond 'fair use,' you must obtain permission from the copyright owner, in this instance NewsFactor. For more information go to: http://www.law.cornell.edu/uscode/17/107.shtml ------------------------------ From: Eric Friedebach Subject: Sprint, Nextel in Talks: Reports Date: 10 Dec 2004 11:34:28 -0800 Organization: http://groups.google.com Sprint Corp. and Nextel Communications Inc. are in merger discussions, according to press reports. The talks are ongoing and the transaction is being treated as a merger of equals since the two companies share similar market capitalization of more than $30-billion (U.S.), Dow Jones Newswires reported, citing unnamed sources. http://tinyurl.com/6838l Eric Friedebach /KMPX Rocks!/ ------------------------------ From: vijay.vishy@gmail.com Subject: Unlimited Calling Plan to India Date: 10 Dec 2004 11:35:48 -0800 Organization: http://groups.google.com Iam looking for a unlimited international calling plan to India from USA. I am spending hundreds of dollars every month. Thanks. ------------------------------ From: David O. Rodriguez Date: Fri, 10 Dec 2004 12:53:20 -0500 Subject: Now, Kudos to Charlie Christ!!! Re: NorVergence The link below will (hopefully) take you to an article about Florida's Attoney General doing much like New York's Attorney General earlier this week. He has reached a settlement with Patriot Leasing to eliminate the contracts for the NorVergence initiated leases. However, Charlie Christ seems to have one-up'ed New York's Attorney General Eliot Spitzer by getting Patriot Leasing to reimburse his office for costs . I wonder, is there is any action being taken by any Attorney Generals against the Salzanos? http://myfloridalegal.com/newsrel.nsf/newsreleases/9F3150A58EA704B785256F66005269B3 ------------------------------ Date: Fri, 10 Dec 2004 13:25:43 EST From: Telecom dailyLead from USTA Subject: Sprint, Nextel in Merger Talks Telecom dailyLead from USTA December 10, 2004 http://www.dailylead.com/latestIssue.jsp?i=18040&l=2017006 TODAY'S HEADLINES NEWS OF THE DAY * Sprint, Nextel in merger talks BUSINESS & INDUSTRY WATCH * Covad announces nationwide VoIP rollout * AT&T, Intel form partnership * Cisco buys remaining portion of BCN * Cable executives consider joining forces for wireless services USTA SPOTLIGHT * USTA Webinar: USF&USAC, Funding Updates, Tuesday, Dec. 14, 2004, 1:30 p.m. EMERGING TECHNOLOGIES * Fast wireless network two years away, T-Mobile says Follow the link below to read quick summaries of these stories and others. http://www.dailylead.com/latestIssue.jsp?i=18040&l=2017006 ------------------------------ Date: Fri, 10 Dec 2004 11:47:47 -0500 From: Bob Kester Subject: Packet8 I was a Packet8 user for about a year (until about a year ago). Here are some comments on my experiences. First, I used the terminal adapter they provided on a fixed IP address on my LAN. While, as shipped, it is configured to pull an IP address via DHCP -- it can be configured to use a fixed IP. They have a FAQ describing just how to set that up (and, I just checked, it is still there). We never had a problem with delays or echoes that some have mentioned here. Originally, the volume we were getting was a little higher than what you would expect on a POTS line (which was certainly beneficial to anyone that has some hearing loss). But, a firmware upgrade seemed to adjust that downward somewhat. When we signed up for service, their available numbers in our state were nonexistent. (Since that time they have certainly corrected that -- seems like they have numbers available in just about every town around here). But, because of that, we did not see many incoming calls, except for a few tests that we ran. The rate center we picked for our number was a local call to a military post that our daughter was able to call into from overseas. We envisioned she would be able to use that number to complete telephone calls to us -- but that particular military post she had to go thru the base operator, and they would not complete calls to that particular exchange. Since she could use a calling card to complete the call to us, that was not a big deal. And, I could have had that number moved to some other location where she could dial directly. The problems we had were primarily two: (1) Many times, when we placed a call, we would get a busy. Initially the TA only provided a reorder busy and it was hard to tell just where the problem was. (A later firmware updated provided a real busy, also.) (2) On some occasions, we would have a one-way dropout of audio. Very disconcerting! You could be talking to someone, suddenly you realized they weren't answering -- they were maybe still hearing you, maybe not. On both these problems the troubleshooting method was to run pings against their server. There were some times when that produced dismal responses, and according to them it was my ISP's problem. But, after running a traceroute to their server, and running ping on the next hop out from the destination, things always were solid. Certainly not my ISP's problem, and most likely theirs. The need to dial all numbers as 10-digit numbers were a problem for some people here :-) and as a result it didn't get the use it might have otherwise. I never had any problem with their support people. Generally, my questions were such I could email them, and always got good responses. I can't think of any situation where I needed an immediate urgent reply, and generally I made it clear in my email they could take their time in answering. But, I was always satisfied with them. Why did we drop the service? We were paying just a few pennies over $20 a month for unlimited calling in the US and Canada. Our telephone company came up with a $15 unlimited calling (US only). Since we never call Canada, that wasn't a serious consideration. In exchange for that $5 difference, we gave up the second line for outgoing calls. The needed number of redials (because of the incompleted calls) were frustrating. Again, most of our phones have a REDIAL button, but that doesn't always get used :-( The only other observation. Their records of call usage (inbound and outbound) were online, and great. You could go in and view them in real time, any time. But, when I called and canceled the service -- that apparently immediately eliminated my access to them. My account name and password were off their books! As I mentioned, my experiences are now a year old. It's a fast changing field, and I'm sure they have made many changes in the service they provide. ...Bob The FROM: email address has been set up for receiving SPAM. Don't bother using it -- email to it won't be read. Right now, you can use: TCdig01 [SHIFT/2] kesters [DOT] org (Until the scumbags figure that one out.) ------------------------------ Date: Fri, 10 Dec 2004 08:27:26 -0500 From: Michael Quinn Michael Organization: Booz Allen Hamilton Subject: Automatic Number Identification (ANI) Service Please withold my email address and organization, ok to use my name. Someone was recently enquiring about ANI. By coincidence a few days ago, I came across a toll-free ANI service, although that is perhaps not the the intended purpose. The following number appeared on my caller ID at home, possibly in conjunction with a blood drive or telemarketing call: (866) 849-3243 When I called the number to see who it was, it was an automated "voice messaging center" (no further info was provided) which gives an option to be removed from their call list. If that option is selected, it reads back the number from which one is calling. Worked from home as well as inside an ISDN PABX at my office. Who knows how long it will be in service, so TD subcribers may wish to take advantage of while it's there. Regards, Mike [TELECOM Digest Editor's Note: Thanks for this entry, Mike. And it does two jobs for you at one time. It identifies the line you are using, *AND* it eliminates your number from some telemarketing program at the same time! Works for me! PAT] ------------------------------ From: miniotdr@yahoo.com (Marc) Subject: How About Network Protection Date: 10 Dec 2004 10:38:10 -0800 Organization: http://groups.google.com Hi Folks, I am looking for information and data regarding network protection in North America -- even if depending on the State : what are the actual processes for a network owner/carrier/provider to get authorizations to initiate civil engineering works on its infrastructure. For instance, say California, on the Coast : there is a landslide, after heavy rains. SBC's optical cables are down, need repair. What is the process, for SBC and its contractors (e.g. Maintenance) to get clearance for intervention on the US1 ? Shall you need a more precize question, please feel free to tell ! Thanks in advance, _Marc miniotdr@yahoo.com ------------------------------ From: David Quinton Subject: Re: Information Wanted on WI-FI Date: Fri, 10 Dec 2004 07:55:44 +0000 On 9 Dec 2004 12:47:03 -0800, mykonosboy@tiscali.it (DVB) wrote: > Hi, > I have a PC with tecnology Centrino (Intel Pro/Wireless 2100 WLAN > 802.11b,11Mbps). > I'm going for holiday in Mexico in an hotel that provides a connection > to internet through a modem called ALAMBRICO. > I've never heard about this router, in Italy nobody knows what it is. > Do you know if I can use my laptop to connect to internet in the > hotel? whilst all the links seems to be in Spanish, many contain 801.xx. So I guess it should be OK? Interesting Xmas gifts: . Locate your Mobile phone: ------------------------------ From: Tim@Backhome.org Subject: Re: Radar Detectors Date: Fri, 10 Dec 2004 04:03:53 -0800 Organization: Cox Communications Ron Chapman wrote: > In article , Tim@Backhome.org > wrote: >> The automatic devices for slight speed violations are revenue devices >> for the most part. But, the devices that catch red light runners >> serve a genuine safety purposes. > Ah. So maybe you can explain to me why cities that employ these > devices: > (a) pay nothing for them, and receive commissions from the PRIVATE > OPERATORS who place them; and > (b) change the timing of the lights with such devices, in order to > DRAMATICALLY shorten the time of the yellow light, a change which > drastically increases the likelihood of your getting caught by the > device? > By the way, such a change in timing is: > (a) NOT within national traffic guidelines, and > (b) NOT implemented on traffic lights that DO NOT have such cameras in > place. > Hmmmmm. > Tim, you're wrong. The sole reason for these devices is revenue > enhancement. > If the lawmakers want to make everything I do illegal, then I guess > I'll be a criminal the rest of my life. I can only speak for Southern California. All of your concerns have been addressed. The yellow lights have been extended a small interval beyond what the state recommends just to avoid that accusation. Perhaps in your area it is different. Running red lights is already illegal and very, very dangerous. Where they have been installed around here side-collision fatalities have decreased. That is significant. If you drive like you should you won't run red lights. And, dont' tell me that running a red light is like driving 40 in a 35 mph zone. If you believe that you are probably a problem driver that needs to be caught by these red light devices. So, please don't tell me I am wrong. That itself shows an inclination on your part to be unreasonably opinionated about the issue of red light enforcement. There are drivers in these parts that don't feel red lights apply to them, because they are "special." ------------------------------ From: Justin Time Subject: Re: Radar Detectors Date: 10 Dec 2004 05:33:44 -0800 Organization: http://groups.google.com Ron Chapman wrote: > Ah. So maybe you can explain to me why cities that employ these > devices: > (a) pay nothing for them, and receive commissions from the PRIVATE > OPERATORS who place them; and The quick answer to point (a) is there is no expenditure of public funds for either the equipment or its maintenance. Your point that the cameras are then used as a revenue stream is correct. > b) change the timing of the lights with such devices, in order to > DRAMATICALLY shorten the time of the yellow light, a change which > drastically increases the likelihood of your getting caught by the > device? Now this is a bold statement with no proof to your allegation. While I am not saying that retiming of traffic lights hasn't occurred, can you cite some specific examples of cities where this has been done? I know that in the city where I work, one unit was removed because it was found to be installed at an intersection where the light was improperly timed to allow traffic to clear an intersection before the light at the next intersection turned red. Rodgers Platt ------------------------------ From: hancock4@bbs.cpcn.com Subject: Re: Radar Detectors Date: 10 Dec 2004 08:06:11 -0800 Organization: http://groups.google.com Ron Chapman wrote: > Ah. So maybe you can explain to me why cities that employ these > devices: > (a) pay nothing for them, and receive commissions from the PRIVATE > OPERATORS who place them; and That is not true. The cost of the machines is deducted from the net revenue of the fines received. Everybody supposedly thinks its good when govt "privitizes", and here is an example of govt doing just that. > (b) change the timing of the lights with such devices, in order to > DRAMATICALLY shorten the time of the yellow light, a change which > drastically increases the likelihood of your getting caught by the > device? I find that very hard to believe. As as the claim of "revenue enhancement", allow me to note: 1) One city is installing the cameras at intersections with a seriously high accident rate. I'm familiar with these intersections, and motorists routinely keep going even after the yellow goes to red. In other words, these aren't questionable instances, but rather the motorists entered the intersection clearly after their light went to red. The sloppy driving of motorists brought this enforcement onto themselves. 2) My own town set up a speed trap and I watched it work. The speed limit was 25 mph on a narrow residential street and prominently posted. They set the flag cutoff at 40 mph. Despite it being 40, they still cited many drivers flying through. 3) At city council meetings, residents regularly come in to complain about speeders on their local streets and demand the cops do something about it. City govt is under pressure from such residents. The reality is that motorists, for a variety of reasons, are just too damn impatient and drive too fast and recklessly. Advocates for higher speeds claim roads are safer because fatalities are down. That is true, but fatalities are down because cars and roads get safer--airbags, more people using seatbelts, better road crash protection, less drunk drivers. What the advocates don't say is that the basic accident rate (including minor ones like 'fender benders') is sky high and total property damage in dollars continues to climb. I wish the cops didn't need cameras and speed traps, but motorists have only themselves to blame. ------------------------------ From: Henry Cabot Henhouse III Subject: Re: NASA Van Crash in California Leaves 3 Dead Date: Fri, 10 Dec 2004 11:19:45 -0800 Oh my, how news accounts vary ... I was watching the live local TV news coverage. A motorist saw the van drive off and called the CHP, who responded very quickly. Assessing the situation, they called for paramedics, etc. The officers scaled down the treacherous terrain to see what they could do ... Nothing about a victim of the crash "climbing up" to get help... Lisa Minter wrote in message news:telecom23.586.2@telecom-digest.org ... > By ROBERT JABLON, Associated Press Writer > LA CANADA FLINTRIDGE, Calif. - > A commuter van from NASA's Jet Propulsion Laboratory tumbled 200 feet > off a twisting mountain road Wednesday, killing three people and > injuring seven, at least four of them seriously, authorities said. > The van was carrying 10 people to the laboratory when it plunged off > the Angeles Crest Highway in the Angeles National Forest at about 6:30 > a.m. Wednesday morning and rolled down a mountainside about 15 miles > north of downtown Los Angeles, Los Angeles County Fire Department > inspector Ron Haralson said. > "One person was able to get out of the van and make his way up to the > road" to get help, Haralson said. > The van was carrying six employees of the lab in Pasadena, two > contractors and two NASA employees, said Blaine Baggett, a spokesman > at JPL, which is the control center for several NASA projects, > including the Mars rovers. The victims' names were not immediately > released. > "It's a very, very sad day for all of us at JPL," Baggett said, adding > that employees will be offered grief counseling. > Three people were pronounced dead at the scene. One person was flung > from the van. Others lay trapped in the battered white van in the > middle of a dense forest until firefighters arrived and tore off the > doors to reach victims, who were then taken by helicopter to > hospitals. > Of the survivors, one person was in critical condition, three were in > serious condition, two had minor injuries and one person was still > being evaluated, Haralson said. > The cause of the accident was not immediately known. Clouds and fog > shrouded the site, at an altitude of about 1,500 feet. Snow dotted > flanks of the mountain, but the road itself was clear. > Hundreds of cars a day travel the highway, a twisting, two-lane > blacktop with steep drops. Commuters living in the Antelope Valley > area northeast of Los Angeles use it as a shortcut to reach a freeway > in Pasadena. > About 450 of the 5,500 people who work at JPL participate in its > vanpool program, which involves about 30 vans, Baggett said. [TELECOM Digest Editor's Note: The fact that one news source reported it one way and another source reported it another way does not mean the one contradicts the other. I am sure CHP had *many* phone calls about the matter right after it happened. I remember in 1972 when the Illinois Central Railroad suburban train I was riding on collided with the other suburban train leaving a few hundred people dead; as one of the few (and probably first) person to walk off the train and view the carnage all around me, I of course walked a few steps to the nearest fire department 'call box' (as they were known in those days; you opened the door on the little box and pulled the lever) and put in an alarm. Some people fleeing for their lives from another exit on the train probably did the same thing from pay phones on the station platform, etc. I did not wait for 'my' firemen to arrive and explain myself; thirty seconds or a minute later when I heard the sirens in the distance and knew they were on the way, I walked out to the street and flagged a cab and continued on my way to work. Later that day, the _Chicago Daily News_ had me listed as the person who had first notified authorities; on the TV news that evening, they interviewed some excited lady who they said was first at the report. PAT] ------------------------------ From: jim.woodward@genesis-data.com Subject: Re: Anyone Using Avaya Communication Manager API? Date: 10 Dec 2004 12:46:30 -0800 Organization: http://groups.google.com Chip, Do you still require more information on CMAPI?? Or have you resolved your problem?? Jim ------------------------------ From: phoneguide@gmail.com Subject: Re: Question About ROLM PBX Telephones Date: 10 Dec 2004 12:57:45 -0800 Organization: http://groups.google.com ROLM was originally an IBM CBX / PBX voice switching venture that was in North America's arrival was purchased away from the German company SEIMENS. IBM made many advancements and improvements to the systems proprietary operating system and architecture (Americanizing it). IBM later sold the ROLM CBX / PBX product back to SEIMENS for a handsome profit. SEIMENS then revised the o/s and architecture with it's own German touch. Their new systems struggled mightly to hang on as third most distributed voice switching platform in North America. Consumers and system administrators were clearly NOT impressed with what had been re-engineered or otherwise taken back to a Version 1.0 release. The early versions of HICOM (SEIMENS revised ROLM) lost much of the market it had locked into for years. Loyal customers were no longer loyal to the ROLM name. A terrific interactive ROLM User Guide still exist and serves those who still run on the american~ized ROLM 9751 9004 & 9005 platforms. That web-site is http://www.9751.com Joseph Bergstein wrote: > In a message from Martin McCormick, he states: >> The Rolm PBX'S are made by Seimens, as far as I know. > ROLM PBX'x have been made by the Rolm Company since they were founded. As I recall, ROLM actually started out manufacturing MILSPEC Nova (Data General) computers in the early '70s. I recall seeing them as the console computer on early Amdahl 470 mainframes. > Rolm PBXs up to and including the current 9751 are still made by > ROLM. Since the ROLM - Siemens merger, and subsequent acquisition, > the two firms indicate that they are merging their technology > platforms, but so far Siemens does not make ROLM PBX's, per se > (other than now owning the ROLM company). ------------------------------ From: Geoffrey Welsh Subject: Re: Online Research Worries Many Educators Date: Fri, 10 Dec 2004 16:07:02 -0500 Ron Chapman wrote: > It's all about EDITING. Or, as I described it years ago, editorial responsibility. Although mistakes happen, CNN, the New York Times, Newsweek, and the Encyclopedia Brittania invest a fair bit of time making sure that what they publish is correct, or at least defensible. Of course, people who are not as concerned about editorial responsibility -- or who lack the faculties to meet what you and I might describe as editorial responsibility -- print all sorts of drivel on flyers and hand them out to everyone who walks past them on the street, but we can see the difference between those and publications. And, as you point out with the dog comment, on the internet it can be difficult to tell the difference between those who take editorial responsibility seriously and those who don't. We certainly can't expect kids learning how to do research to know. Geoffrey Welsh ------------------------------ From: Rick Merrill Subject: Re: Dropping SBC For a VoIP Solution -- Vonage or Packet8 ?? Organization: Comcast Online Date: Fri, 10 Dec 2004 21:47:13 GMT Ringo Langly wrote: > Hi Rick, > I guess I don't understand ... the Telephone Adapter (DTA310 in my > case) has one RJ45 connector plus my ISP only allows one public IP > address. If I connect the Telephone Adapter to my cable modem first > then it will get the public IP address -- not my router, which will > leave my network without Internet access. > I appriciate the suggestion, but either I've missed something or you're > mistaken. The only way to connect (unless I had two IP addresses from > my ISP) is the way it is currently connected: > Cablemodem >> Router >> Telephone Adapter / Computers Then your TA has no way to perform QoS (Quality of Service) and your voice performance will suffer if any computer IO is happening at the same time. You are forced to use phone OR computer but not both. Sympathy, Rick ------------------------------ TELECOM Digest is an electronic journal devoted mostly but not exclusively to telecommunications topics. It is circulated anywhere there is email, in addition to various telecom forums on a variety of networks such as Compuserve and America On Line, Yahoo Groups, and other forums. It is also gatewayed to Usenet where it appears as the moderated newsgroup 'comp.dcom.telecom'. TELECOM Digest is a not-for-profit, mostly non-commercial educational service offered to the Internet by Patrick Townson. All the contents of the Digest are compilation-copyrighted. You may reprint articles in some other media on an occasional basis, but please attribute my work and that of the original author. Contact information: Patrick Townson/TELECOM Digest Post Office Box 50 Independence, KS 67301 Phone: 620-402-0134 Fax 1: 775-255-9970 Fax 2: 530-309-7234 Fax 3: 208-692-5145 Email: editor@telecom-digest.org Subscribe: telecom-subscribe@telecom-digest.org Unsubscribe:telecom-unsubscribe@telecom-digest.org This Digest is the oldest continuing e-journal about telecomm- unications on the Internet, having been founded in August, 1981 and published continuously since then. Our archives are available for your review/research. We believe we are the oldest e-zine/mailing list on the internet in any category! URL information: http://telecom-digest.org Anonymous FTP: mirror.lcs.mit.edu/telecom-archives/archives/ (or use our mirror site: ftp.epix.net/pub/telecom-archives) Email <==> FTP: telecom-archives@telecom-digest.org Send a simple, one line note to that automated address for a help file on how to use the automatic retrieval system for archives files. You can get desired files in email. ************************************************************************* * TELECOM Digest is partially funded by a grant from * * Judith Oppenheimer, President of ICB Inc. and purveyor of accurate * * 800 & Dot Com News, Intelligence, Analysis, and Consulting. * * http://ICBTollFree.com, http://1800TheExpert.com * * Views expressed herein should not be construed as representing * * views of Judith Oppenheimer or ICB Inc. * ************************************************************************* ICB Toll Free News. Contact information is not sold, rented or leased. One click a day feeds a person a meal. Go to http://www.thehungersite.com Copyright 2004 ICB, Inc. and TELECOM Digest. All rights reserved. Our attorney is Bill Levant, of Blue Bell, PA. ************************ DIRECTORY ASSISTANCE JUST 65 CENTS ONE OR TWO INQUIRIES CHARGED TO YOUR CREDIT CARD! REAL TIME, UP TO DATE! SPONSORED BY TELECOM DIGEST AND EASY411.COM SIGN UP AT http://www.easy411.com/telecomdigest ! ************************ --------------------------------------------------------------- Finally, the Digest is funded by gifts from generous readers such as yourself who provide funding in amounts deemed appropriate. Your help is important and appreciated. A suggested donation of fifty dollars per year per reader is considered appropriate. See our address above. Please make at least a single donation to cover the cost of processing your name to the mailing list. All opinions expressed herein are deemed to be those of the author. Any organizations listed are for identification purposes only and messages should not be considered any official expression by the organization. End of TELECOM Digest V23 #590 ****************************** From editor@telecom-digest.org Sat Dec 11 15:45:56 2004 Received: (from ptownson@localhost) by massis.lcs.mit.edu (8.11.6p3/8.11.6) id iBBKjuS21662; Sat, 11 Dec 2004 15:45:56 -0500 (EST) Date: Sat, 11 Dec 2004 15:45:56 -0500 (EST) From: editor@telecom-digest.org Message-Id: <200412112045.iBBKjuS21662@massis.lcs.mit.edu> X-Authentication-Warning: massis.lcs.mit.edu: ptownson set sender to editor@telecom-digest.org using -f To: ptownson Approved: patsnewlist Subject: TELECOM Digest V23 #591 TELECOM Digest Sat, 11 Dec 2004 15:46:00 EST Volume 23 : Issue 591 Inside This Issue: Editor: Patrick A. Townson Urban Legends Reference Pages: Celling (Marcus Didius Falco) SIM Saver Backup and Copy Unit for GSM Cell Phones (Marcus Didius Falco) Cellphones Aloft: The Inevitable is Closer (Marcus Didius Falco) OMA Compliant PoC Server (BB) Re: Unlimited Calling Plan to India (John Levine) Re: Unlimited Calling Plan to India (Gordon S. Hlavenka) The End of TV as We Know It (Monty Solomon) They've Got Your Number (Monty Solomon) Vonage Voice Quality Getting Worse? (John R. Levine) Telecom and VOIP (Voice over Internet Protocol) Digest for the Internet. All contents here are copyrighted by Patrick Townson and the individual writers/correspondents. Articles may be used in other journals or newsgroups, provided the writer's name and the Digest are included in the fair use quote. By using -any name or email address- included herein for -any- reason other than responding to an article herein, you agree to pay a hundred dollars to the recipients of the email. =========================== Addresses herein are not to be added to any mailing list, nor to be sold or given away without explicit written consent. Chain letters, viruses, porn, spam, and miscellaneous junk are definitely unwelcome. We must fight spam for the same reason we fight crime: not because we are naive enough to believe that we will ever stamp it out, but because we do not want the kind of world that results when no one stands against crime. Geoffrey Welsh =========================== See the bottom of this issue for subscription and archive details and the name of our lawyer; other stuff of interest. ---------------------------------------------------------------------- Date: Fri, 10 Dec 2004 22:59:59 -0500 From: Marcus Didius Falco Subject: Urban Legends Reference Pages: Politics (Celling Your Soul) http://www.snopes.com/politics/business/cell411.asp Claim: A directory of cell phone numbers will soon be published. Status: Multiple see below. Example: [Collected on the Internet, 2004] A directory of cell phone numbers will soon be published for all consumers to have access to. This will open the doors for solicitors to call you on your cell phones, using up the precious minutes that we pay lots of money for. The Federal Trade Commission has set up a "do not call" list. It is called a cell phone registry. To be included on the "do not call" list, you must call from the number you wish to register. The number is 1-888-382-1222 or you can go to their website at www.donotcall.gov. ---------- Starting Jan 1, 2005, all cell phone numbers will be made public to telemarketing firms. So this means as of Jan 1, your cell phone may start ringing off the hook with telemarketers, but unlike your home phone, most plans pay for your incoming calls. These telemarketers will eat up your free minutes and end up costing money. According to the National Do Not Call List, you have until Dec 15, 2004 to get on the national "Do Not Call List" for cell phones. You can either call 1-888-382-1222 from the cell phone that you wish to have put on the "do not call list" or you can do it online at www.donotcall.gov . Registering only takes a minute, is in effect for 5 years. All of you will need to register before Dec 15. You may want to also do your own personal cell phones. Origins: As the use of cellular telephone technology has grown tremendously in the last several years, many consumers have given up maintaining traditional land-line phone service entirely. They prefer the convenient portability of cell phones, as well as the privacy: So far, cell phone numbers have generally been excluded from printed phone directories and directory assistance services, and protections have been put in place to restrict telemarketing calls to cell phones. Soon, however, some of the privacy that cell phones provide may be eroded. Six national wireless companies (AllTel, AT&T Wireless, Cingular, Nextel, Sprint PCS, and T-Mobile) have banded together and hired Qsent, Inc. to produce a Wireless 411 service. Their goal is to pool their listings to create a comprehensive directory of cell phone customer names and phone numbers that would be made available to directory assistance providers. (In most places, telephone users can call directory assistance at 411 [for local numbers] or by dialing an area code plus 555-1212 [for out-of-area numbers] and, by providing enough information to identify an individual phone customer [usually a full name and city of residence], obtain that customer's phone number. Many cell phone customers are opposed to the proposed Wireless 411 service for a number of reasons: * They prefer the privacy of knowing that their cell phone numbers are available only to those to whom they provide them. They don't want other people being able to obtain their cell phone numbers without their consent or knowledge. * They are concerned that their cell phone numbers will be sold to telemarketers (or other groups that might make undesirable use of those numbers). * They see one of the goals of the Wireless 411 service as a ploy to spread cell phone numbers to wider circles of friends and acquaintances, who will then place calls to cell phones and thereby force cell customers to pay for additional wireless minutes. The wireless companies behind the proposed Wireless 411 service contend that their service will be beneficial to cellular customers and that they have addressed those customers' major concerns: * The service would save money for the estimated five million customers who use only cellular phones and currently pay to have their cell phone numbers listed in phone directories. * The Wireless 411 service would be strictly "opt-in" that is, wireless customers will be included in the directory only if they specifically request to be added. The phone numbers of wireless customers who do nothing will not be included, those who choose to be listed can have their numbers removed from the directory if they change their minds, and there is no charge for requesting to be included or choosing not to be included. * The Wireless 411 information will not be included in printed phone directories, distributed in other printed form, made available via the Internet, or sold to telemarketers. It will be made available only to operator service centers performing the 411 directory assistance service. Nonetheless, many consumers don't trust the Wireless 411 consortium to uphold their promises, and although Qsent and its clients plan to make the Wireless 411 service available sometime in 2005, its implementation in that time frame is far from certain, as the wireless companies are still fighting proposed legislation which seeks to regulate wireless phone directories. So, although the gist of the message quoted at the head of this page is correct in alerting consumers to a proposed directory of cell phone numbers, it is misleading in stating that such a directory will "soon be published" (the word "published" implies making a printed directory available, which the wireless consortium maintains they will not do) and in directing readers to sign up with the The National Do Not Call Registry. The latter step will not keep wireless customer listings out of the proposed Wireless 411 database it will only add their phone numbers to a list of numbers off-limits to most telemarketers, a step which is premature (because the Wireless 411 directory has not yet been implemented) and largely unnecessary (because the Wireless 411 directory information is not supposed to be supplied to telemarketers, and because FCC regulations already in place block the bulk of telemarketing calls to cell phones). Adding one's cell phone number to the National Do Not Call Registry (even if currently unnecessary) won't likely have any adverse effect, but customers should be aware of exactly what that action will or will not accomplish. Some versions of the exhortation to cell phone users to add their names to the Do Not Call Registry erroneously state there is a 15 December 2004 deadline for getting listed. Says Lois Greisman, the Federal Trade Commission official who oversees the anti-telemarketing registry: "There is no deadline; there never has been a deadline to register." However, belief that there might be such a cut-off coupled with the e-mailed alerts themselves have served to multiply many times over the number of registrations. Since the initial wave of sign-ups following the 2003 launch of the list, registrations have come in at the rate of 200,000 new numbers a week. Yet in the final week of November 2004, nearly 1 million new subscribers were added, and in the first week of December 2004, that figure jumped to 2 million. At this point in time, 69 million phone numbers are contained in the registry. Additional information: Wireless 411 Service: Q&A = (Qsent) Privacy and the Wireless 411 Service (Qsent) Last updated: 10 December 2004 The URL for this page is http://www.snopes.com/politics/business/cell411.asp Urban Legends Reference Pages copyright 1995-2004 by Barbara and David P. Mikkelson This material may not be reproduced without permission. ---------- Sources: Dalton Jr., Richard J. "FCC Warns Telemarketers Against Calling Cell Phones." Contra Costa Times. 20 November 2003. Mayer, Caroline. "Bogus E-Mail Worries Users Of Cell Phones." The Washington Post. 10 December 2004 (p. E1). Stinnett, Chuck. "Wireless Phone Privacy." The [Henderson] Gleaner. 14 November 2004. ------------------------------ Date: Fri, 10 Dec 2004 22:00:12 -0500 From: Marcus Didius Falco Subject: SIM Saver Backup and Copy Unit for GSM Cell Phones I hesitate to send you this, since it is a commercial notice. However, it does address a common issue that I have seen people ask on some lists. I have no commercial relations with this site, except as a (non-paying) reader of his newsletter. There are related articles on the site, and the fellow also unlocks some GSM cell-phones. http://www.thetravelinsider.info/phones/simsaver.htm What is the biggest hassle if you lose or change your phone? Copying over -- or recreating -- all your contact information is the biggest hassle for most people. This ingenious and inexpensive SIM Saver Backup and copy device can save you much time and inconvenience. Web The Travel Insider Free Newsletter In addition to our feature articles, we offer you a free weekly newsletter with a mix of news and opinions on travel related topics. SIM Saver Backup and Copy Unit for GSM Cell Phones An easy and affordable way to backup and copy the information on your GSM phone's SIM card The compact SIM Saver is wonderfully easy to use -- simply press the B button to backup a SIM card and the R button to restore the information to a SIM card. You backup your computer data, don't you? Well, so too you should with your phone. And if you're changing wireless providers (eg from AT&T to T-mobile) you'll need to copy all your phone book data from one SIM to the other. Here's a very simple, easy, and inexpensive way to back up, copy, and transfer the phonebook data off your GSM mobile phone's SIM card. Description The SIM Saver Backup and Copy Unit is a very compact and lightweight device. It measures 1.75" x 1.25" x 0.5" and weighs 0.5 oz, including a short chain and key ring. Operating the unit couldn't be simpler -- there are two buttons, one for backing up SIMs and the other for restoring them. A single light indicates when the unit is reading to or from a SIM card. The unit is supplied complete with the three tiny mercury batteries it uses pre-installed, and has a simple short instruction card that clearly tells you how to use the unit. The unit has a full one year warranty. Functionality The SIM Saver unit is very easy to use. It has no need for an On/Off switch -- you simply insert a SIM card and then press the appropriate button. You almost don't need to read the instructions -- all you really need to know is graphically shown on the top of the unit. It shows you which way to put the SIM into the unit, and then the button next to the arrow pointing into the unit with the letter 'B' is to back up the data off the SIM and into the unit. To restore data from the unit's memory and onto a SIM card, you press the button next to the letter 'R' and the arrow pointing out from the unit. The LED lights up while the unit is copying the data between the SIM card and itself, and turns off when it is finished. This unit is vastly simpler to operate than the SIM Backup 500 unit we reviewed before. There is no need to bother about passwords or multiple commands or anything more complicated than the two buttons and one light. Backing up takes about 40 seconds to complete. Restoring takes about the same time as backing up. We use our unit primarily as a spare copy/backup of our main SIM card, holding all the phonebook data from the SIM card in the unit's memory, just in case we ever lose the phone or SIM card. This stored copy can also be useful if we damage the SIM card itself, or if we need to copy data from one SIM to another. Although the unit comes attached to a key ring by a short chain, we don't keep ours with our keys, but instead in our top desk drawer. The chances of ever needing to do an emergency copy/restore are very low! Compatible with all GSM phones and their SIM cards. The unit will work with any SIM card from any GSM phone, from anywhere in the world. This makes it particularly helpful when you have multiple SIMs -- a SIM for the US, perhaps several prepaid SIMs for elsewhere in the world, and a global roaming SIM as well. You can easily copy and transfer your phone book data between all the different SIM cards. Note that your phone must be a GSM phone, with a SIM card, for this unit to be able to help you. In the US, most phones supplied by AT&T, Cingular, and T-mobile are GSM and SIM based. Most phones supplied by other wireless companies are not. Helpful Hints I find I only use the unit once every few months, when I remember to update my backup copies of SIMs I have. And when I do need to use it, I often can't find the instruction sheet. So that I don't forget the instructions, I've taped a summary sheet of instructions to the back of the unit. You might want to consider doing the same thing. Because I have several SIM cards with different phone directories, I have labelled each SIM Saver with the name of the SIM card it has stored inside it. When you're adding phone numbers to your phone book, store the phone numbers in full international format. Don't store local numbers as only seven digit or ten digit numbers. That way, as you travel around the US, the phone will always correctly dial the phone numbers, and if you travel overseas, the phone will still know how to dial numbers. Full international format means you start off with the international access code (the plus sign +) then the country code, area code, and phone number. So to save a US phone number, eg (206)555-1212, you'd use this sequence +12065551212. The unit will only work if you have turned the PIN code off on your SIM, so be sure that you have done this before using it. Battery Life The three mercury watch size batteries have a life of at least two years and probably more, and when they are nearly flat, the device gives you a low battery warning (the LED flashes continuously). Cost The SIM Saver unit is inexpensive, and has a retail price of $19.95. We like them so much we've decided to sell this unit ourselves. Simply click the button below to purchase one or more (they make a great gift!) using Paypal and charging to your credit card or bank account. A single $2.50 shipping charge is added, no matter how many units you buy. We'll also include our special instruction summary sheet that you can tape to the bottom of the unit so you too won't be stuck if you can't find your instruction manual. And, if you do lose your instruction manual, you're welcome to ask us at any time and download an online PDF replacement copy. You'll get an invaluable accessory to simplify the management of your cell phone name and number directory, and you'll be supporting The Travel Insider at the same time. Summary This is an easy to understand and easy to use device that provides a clear and valuable benefit if you have a GSM SIM based cell phone. Recommended. Originally published 28 Sep 2004, last update 28 Sep 2004 You may freely reproduce or distribute this article for noncommercial purposes as long as you give credit to me as original writer. ------------------------------ Date: Fri, 10 Dec 2004 21:55:32 -0500 From: Marcus Didius Falco Subject: Cellphones Aloft: The Inevitable is Closer http://www.nytimes.com/2004/12/10/technology/10phone.html?oref=login http://www.nytimes.com/2004/12/10/technology/10phone.html?oref=login&pagewanted=print&position= December 10, 2004 Cellphones Aloft: The Inevitable Is Closer By KEN BELSON and MICHELINE MAYNARD The day may finally be coming when you will be allowed to make calls on your own cellphone from an airliner. Trouble is, so will the passengers sitting on either side of you, and in front and in back of you, as well. Federal regulators plan next week to begin considering rules that would end the official ban on cellphone use on commercial flights. Technical challenges and safety questions remain. But if the ban is lifted, one of the last cocoons of relative social silence would disappear, forcing strangers to work out the rough etiquette of involuntary eavesdropping in a confined space. "For some people, the idea of being able to pick up their phone is going to be liberating; for some it's going to drive them crazy," said Addison Schonland, a travel industry consultant at the Innovation Analysis Group in La Jolla, Calif. "Can you imagine 200 people having a conversation at once? There's going to be a big market for noise-canceling headphones." The always-on-the-road business travelers may become the worst offenders, predicted Roger Entner, a telecommunications analyst with the Yankee Group and a frequent flier. "Businessmen will now compete with toddlers for the title of 'most annoying in the airplane,' " Mr. Entner said. It may be years before cellphones become widely used in the skies. To begin with, conventional cellphones, besides raising concerns about interfering with cockpit communications, typically do not work at altitudes above 10,000 feet or so. But some airlines have already begun their own tests of technology meant to make cellphone use feasible at 35,000 feet. They know that the seatback phones they now offer, costing $1.99 a minute or more, have never really caught on. The airlines also know that, while illegal, surreptitious cellphone use at lower altitudes is already common. Airline attendants have caught some passengers using cellphones in airplane lavatories, and others have been spotted huddled in their seats, whispering into their cupped hands. For that matter, the use of BlackBerry hand-held e-mail devices is also rampant, if sub rosa, despite their also being banned on airliners. Famously, some passengers' emergency use of cellphones played a significant role in the final minutes of the hijacked United Airlines Flight 93 before it crashed in a field near Shanksville, Pa., on Sept. 11, 2001. A major federal effort to revisit the rules will begin next Wednesday at a Federal Communications Commission meeting, where the agency is expected to approve two measures. One, an order that is expected to be adopted, would try to introduce more price competition among phone companies to offer telephone and high-speed Internet services from the seatback and end-of-aisle phones that are now on many planes. The second measure will begin the regulatory process of considering whether there are technical solutions to some of the current obstacles to passengers' using their own mobile phones on planes. Safety will be a major consideration in any rule changes. The Federal Aviation Administration and Boeing, the nation's largest builder of airliners, both support the F.C.C.'s ban, arguing that cellphones can interfere with navigation systems. In fact, European newspapers widely reported that use of a cellphone contributed to the crash of a Crossair commuter plane in 2000. LX Flight 498, carrying 10 passengers and crew members, was bound for Dresden when it crashed outside Zurich minutes after it took off, killing all on board. Officially, the reason for the crash remains unknown. But news reports at the time said a passenger apparently took a cellphone call at the same time that the pilot engaged the autopilot controls. The plane subsequently went into a dive. Despite such questions, airlines have begun their own tests of whether cellphone use can be made feasible. A test last July by American Airlines, the nation's biggest, allowed the use of conventional cellphones to place and receive calls by way of a picocell -- a miniature cell tower the size of a pizza box. The system was installed by the wireless equipment maker Qualcomm inside the jet. The picocell linked to several antennas inside a cable that gathered signals from passengers' cellphones and sent them all to a small satellite dish, no bigger than a laptop computer, on top of the plane. From there, the calls were beamed to an orbiting satellite, which sent the calls back to special cell stations linked to phone networks on earth. "It's only a matter of time before we have cellphones on planes," said Scott Becker, senior vice president of Qualcomm's Wireless Systems division. "A lot of the airlines are more open to looking at it now, and people are getting used to using their phones everywhere." Many industry executives say the type of technology tested by American Airlines and Qualcomm is particularly promising because, by funneling all calls through a single communications path, it will be more feasible for the airlines and carriers to track and bill the calls. (The airlines assume they would charge an access fee beyond whatever the customer's own wireless carrier assesses.) The transmission system is also more efficient than using conventional cellular technology, which would require many in-flight phones to continually search for cell towers on the ground. And because calls will be beamed to satellites and then back to earth, passengers will be able to talk while flying over water and other areas where there are few cell towers below. Also, fliers would have the added advantage of being able to receive calls as well as make them. None of this will happen soon, though. Participants in the tests, as well as members of the committee appointed by the F.A.A. to study the various technologies, do not expect any resolution to the debate for at least another two years. A crucial assessment, by the United States Radio Technical Commission for Aeronautics, will not be completed until at least 2007. Others note that a technology already exists that could eventually enable passengers to call from the sky: Internet phone software that runs over high-speed data lines. So far, passengers on some non-United States airlines can pay to use high-speed Internet connections in flight through a service called Connexion by Boeing. In theory, once online with a laptop, a passenger could use Internet phone software and a headset to make calls. But so far, the Internet service is offered by only a handful of airlines like Lufthansa and JAL on a few long-haul flights, and Connexion by Boeing is not promoting the system as a way to make phone calls. Given the cash-short airline industry's need for income, though, many travel industry analysts say that -- whatever the regulatory and technical hurdles -- phone calls from the sky are inevitable. "They will be a revenue stream," predicted Terry Wiseman, publisher of Airfax.com, an online newsletter. "If the price is low, and if you can get billed directly through your carrier, people are going to use the phones." Which is what worries some frequent travelers. "The last thing I want is a bunch of jabbering business geeks," said Paul Saffo, a technology industry consultant who travels 200,000 miles a year on United Airlines and said that flying was his only escape from e-mail and phone calls. "The only quiet time I get is when I fly. It's my meditation time." It will be up to the airline industry, and its passengers, to work out the new terms of engagement, even if the results are as uneven as in other travel industries. Around metropolitan New York City, for example, the main commuter railroads allow unfettered use of cellphones -- to the annoyance of tens of thousands of nonchattering commuters a day -- but on many East Coast Amtrak trains there are typically one or more "quiet cars" where the phones are prohibited. Rich Salter, an in-flight electronics expert with the Salter Group, a consulting firm in Irvine, Calif., said there was already an airline industry proposal circulating that would restrict phone use to only certain portions of each flight. "Maybe the old 'No Smoking' sign could be used as a 'No Talking' sign," he said. Stephen Labaton, in Washington; Matt Richtel, in San Francisco; and Christopher Elliott, in Orlando, Fla., contributed reporting for this article. Copyright 2004 The New York Times Company NOTE: For more telecom/internet/networking/computer news from the daily media, check out our feature 'Telecom Digest Extra' each day at http://telecom-digest.org/td-extra . New articles daily. *** FAIR USE NOTICE. This message contains copyrighted material the use of which has not been specifically authorized by the copyright owner. This Internet discussion group is making it available without profit to group members who have expressed a prior interest in receiving the included information in their efforts to advance the understanding of literary, educational, political, and economic issues, for non-profit research and educational purposes only. I believe that this constitutes a 'fair use' of the copyrighted material as provided for in section 107 of the U.S. Copyright Law. If you wish to use this copyrighted material for purposes of your own that go beyond 'fair use,' you must obtain permission from the copyright owner, in this instance, The New York Times Company. For more information go to: http://www.law.cornell.edu/uscode/17/107.shtml ------------------------------ From: myaskingquestions@yahoo.com (BB) Subject: OMA Compliant PoC Server Date: 10 Dec 2004 20:29:32 -0800 Organization: http://groups.google.com Does anyone know of a free/commercial OMA compliant "Push To Talk" server which can be used for testing a Push To Talk client? ------------------------------ Date: 11 Dec 2004 05:42:58 -0000 From: John Levine Subject: Re: Unlimited Calling Plan to India Organization: I.E.C.C., Trumansburg NY USA > Iam looking for a unlimited international calling plan to India from > USA. I am spending hundreds of dollars every month. I doubt you'll find one, at least not for a price anyone could afford. A little poking around in Google finds lots of prepaid cards with rates under 8 cpm. What are you paying now? John R. Levine, IECC, POB 727, Trumansburg NY 14886 +1 607 330 5711 johnl@iecc.com, Mayor, http://johnlevine.com, Member, Provisional board, Coalition Against Unsolicited Commercial E-mail ------------------------------ Date: Fri, 10 Dec 2004 23:37:52 -0600 From: Gordon S. Hlavenka Reply-To: nospam@crashelex.com Organization: Crash Electronics Subject: Re: Unlimited Calling Plan to India vijay.vishy@gmail.com wrote: > Iam looking for a unlimited international calling plan to India from > USA. I am spending hundreds of dollars every month. Ummm ... Get a Vonage TA, set it up with a number which is local to you, and ship it to whoever you're always calling in India? Or, get a VoIP account with a provider that has service in India, program it with a number local to India, and have them ship their TA to you in the US? Gordon S. Hlavenka http://www.crashelectronics.com "If we imagined he could _find_ the car, we could pretend it might be fixed." - Calvin ------------------------------ Date: Sat, 11 Dec 2004 09:55:44 -0500 From: Monty Solomon Subject: The End of TV as We Know It Sit back on the sofa and get ready for packetized, on-demand, digital broadcasts. By Frank Rose Wired Magazine Issue 12.12 December 2004 We live in the age of the digital packet. Documents, images, music, phone calls -- all get chopped up, propelled through networks, and reassembled at the other end according to Internet protocol. So why not TV? That's the question cable giants like Comcast and Time Warner and Baby Bells like SBC and Verizon have been asking. The concept has profound implications for television and the Internet. TV over Internet protocol -- IPTV -- will transform couch-cruising into an on-demand experience. For the Internet, it will mean broadband at speeds 10, 100, or even 1,000 times faster than today's DSL or cable. Online games would be startlingly realistic; the idea of channels would seem hopelessly archaic. Why not indeed? So far, the answer has been inertia. But competition is a powerful stimulus. For years, DirecTV and EchoStar have been adding subscribers far faster than cable, so cable companies want something satellite can't match. At the same time, voice over IP is enabling cable operators to poach phone customers from telcos. Combine VoIP, truly high-speed broadband, and totally on-demand TV - and you've got such a compelling proposition that the Bell companies figure the only way to survive is to do likewise. IPTV is not to be confused with television over the Internet. On the public Net, packets get delayed or lost entirely -- that's why Web video is so jerky and lo-res. But private networks like Comcast's are engineered, obviously, for reliable video delivery -- which means IPTV will look at least as good as TV coming from digital cable or satellite. It will be accompanied by another, equally critical change. Instead of broadcasting every channel continuously, service providers plan to transmit them only to subscribers who request them. In effect, every channel will be streamed on demand. This will free up huge amounts of bandwidth for hi-def TV and high-speed broadband. Add IP and you get interactive services like caller ID on your TV. And the system will be able to track viewing habits as effectively as Amazon tracks its customers, so ads will be targeted with scary precision. Put it all together and you've got television that's as intensely personalized as 20th-century broadcasting was generic. http://www.wired.com/wired/archive/12.12/start.html?pg=7 ------------------------------ Date: Sat, 11 Dec 2004 10:05:27 -0500 From: Monty Solomon Subject: They've Got Your Number Issue 12.12 - December 2004 Your text messages and address book, and a way to bug your calls. Why spam, scams, and viruses are coming soon to a phone near you. By Annalee Newitz It's a beautiful afternoon in Shepherd's Bush, a bustling neighborhood on the outskirts of London, and Adam Laurie is feeling peckish. Heading out of the office, he's about to pick up more than a sandwich. As he walks, he'll be probing every cell phone that comes within range of a hidden antenna he has connected to the laptop in his bag. We stroll past a park near the Tube station, then wander into a supermarket. Laurie contemplates which sort of crisps to buy while his laptop quietly scans the 2.4-GHz frequency range used by Bluetooth devices, probing the cell phones nestled in other shoppers' pockets and purses. Laurie, 42, the CSO of boutique security firm the Bunker, isn't going to mess with anyone's phone, although he could: With just a few tweaks to the scanning program his computer is running, Laurie could be crashing cell phones all around him, cutting a little swath of telecommunications destruction down the deli aisle. But today Laurie is just gathering data. We are counting how many phones he can hack using Bluetooth, a wireless protocol for syncing cell phones with headsets, computers, and other devices. http://www.wired.com/wired/archive/12.12/phreakers.html The Great Cell Phone Robbery How security flaws in today's mobile phones could add up to tomorrow's perfect crime. http://www.wired.com/wired/archive/12.12/phreakers.html?pg=3D4 ------------------------------ Date: 10 Dec 2004 21:30:40 -0500 From: John R Levine Subject: Vonage Voice Quality Getting Worse? I've had Vonage phone service for nearly two years, running over the T1 in my office. For the most part voice quality has been pretty good. Recently I've found it's often just plain lousy, distortions and dropouts bad enough that I switch to my cell phone which sounds better. It seems to be worse in the evening (eastern time). I looked at some local link statistics and the local connection doesn't seem to be particularly congested, and traceroutes show a path from my ISP through Sprint to the peering point where Vonage connects, with no big delays, Have other people had voice quality problems with Vonage? Regards, John Levine johnl@iecc.com Primary Perpetrator of The Internet for Dummies, Information Superhighwayman wanna-be, http://iecc.com/johnl, Mayor "I dropped the toothpaste", said Tom, crestfallenly. [TELECOM Digest Editor's Note: Well, I have had voice quality problems off an on over the nearly two years I have been a Vonage subscriber also. But I have always blamed it on traffic from other computers running here; I have one computer in particular 'weather station' which goes all the time (see it at http://weatherforecast.us.tf ) and people were telling me about every ten or fifteen seconds the Vonage audio wold drop out, as 'weather station' was sending out its JPG image via ftp to its host. Then I switched to the Motorola TA instead of the Cisco; Motorola came with a 'bypass' which allowed it to sit at the head of the line, and that cured many voice quality problems. But even so, now and then of late I have heard the same complaints once again, and I **assumed** it was still anotehr QoS issue on my end, but maybe that was not the case? PAT] ------------------------------ TELECOM Digest is an electronic journal devoted mostly but not exclusively to telecommunications topics. It is circulated anywhere there is email, in addition to various telecom forums on a variety of networks such as Compuserve and America On Line, Yahoo Groups, and other forums. It is also gatewayed to Usenet where it appears as the moderated newsgroup 'comp.dcom.telecom'. TELECOM Digest is a not-for-profit, mostly non-commercial educational service offered to the Internet by Patrick Townson. All the contents of the Digest are compilation-copyrighted. You may reprint articles in some other media on an occasional basis, but please attribute my work and that of the original author. Contact information: Patrick Townson/TELECOM Digest Post Office Box 50 Independence, KS 67301 Phone: 620-402-0134 Fax 1: 775-255-9970 Fax 2: 530-309-7234 Fax 3: 208-692-5145 Email: editor@telecom-digest.org Subscribe: telecom-subscribe@telecom-digest.org Unsubscribe:telecom-unsubscribe@telecom-digest.org This Digest is the oldest continuing e-journal about telecomm- unications on the Internet, having been founded in August, 1981 and published continuously since then. Our archives are available for your review/research. We believe we are the oldest e-zine/mailing list on the internet in any category! URL information: http://telecom-digest.org Anonymous FTP: mirror.lcs.mit.edu/telecom-archives/archives/ (or use our mirror site: ftp.epix.net/pub/telecom-archives) Email <==> FTP: telecom-archives@telecom-digest.org Send a simple, one line note to that automated address for a help file on how to use the automatic retrieval system for archives files. You can get desired files in email. ************************************************************************* * TELECOM Digest is partially funded by a grant from * * Judith Oppenheimer, President of ICB Inc. and purveyor of accurate * * 800 & Dot Com News, Intelligence, Analysis, and Consulting. * * http://ICBTollFree.com, http://1800TheExpert.com * * Views expressed herein should not be construed as representing * * views of Judith Oppenheimer or ICB Inc. * ************************************************************************* ICB Toll Free News. Contact information is not sold, rented or leased. One click a day feeds a person a meal. Go to http://www.thehungersite.com Copyright 2004 ICB, Inc. and TELECOM Digest. All rights reserved. Our attorney is Bill Levant, of Blue Bell, PA. ************************ DIRECTORY ASSISTANCE JUST 65 CENTS ONE OR TWO INQUIRIES CHARGED TO YOUR CREDIT CARD! REAL TIME, UP TO DATE! SPONSORED BY TELECOM DIGEST AND EASY411.COM SIGN UP AT http://www.easy411.com/telecomdigest ! ************************ --------------------------------------------------------------- Finally, the Digest is funded by gifts from generous readers such as yourself who provide funding in amounts deemed appropriate. Your help is important and appreciated. A suggested donation of fifty dollars per year per reader is considered appropriate. See our address above. Please make at least a single donation to cover the cost of processing your name to the mailing list. All opinions expressed herein are deemed to be those of the author. Any organizations listed are for identification purposes only and messages should not be considered any official expression by the organization. End of TELECOM Digest V23 #591 ****************************** From editor@telecom-digest.org Sat Dec 11 17:44:29 2004 Received: (from ptownson@localhost) by massis.lcs.mit.edu (8.11.6p3/8.11.6) id iBBMiTO22852; Sat, 11 Dec 2004 17:44:29 -0500 (EST) Date: Sat, 11 Dec 2004 17:44:29 -0500 (EST) From: editor@telecom-digest.org Message-Id: <200412112244.iBBMiTO22852@massis.lcs.mit.edu> X-Authentication-Warning: massis.lcs.mit.edu: ptownson set sender to editor@telecom-digest.org using -f To: ptownson Approved: patsnewlist Subject: TELECOM Digest V23 #592 TELECOM Digest Sat, 11 Dec 2004 17:45:00 EST Volume 23 : Issue 592 Inside This Issue: Editor: Patrick A. Townson Napster Entering Ringtone Market (Lisa Minter) Yahoo to Begin Testing Desktop Search in January (Lisa Minter) Supreme Court to Decide Grokster Case (Lisa Minter) What's VOip With Pictures Called? (Rick Merrill) Re: Calling Card Needed - Short Interaction Sequence (NOTvalid) Re: Sprint, Nextel in Merger Talks (pro_engineer_97@yahoo.com) Re: Sprint, Nextel in Merger Talks (Isaiah Beard) Re: Radar Detectors (Ron Chapman) Re: Radar Detectors (Tim@Backhome.org) Re: Radar Detectors (Tony P.) Re: Automatic Number Identification (ANI) Service (Steve Sobol) Re: Question About ROLM PBX Telephones (Fred Goldstein) Re: Vonage, VoicePulse Push Forward With Video (John Levine) Re: How to Call from A to B to C? Please Help (Michael D. Sullivan) Re: Dropping SBC For a VoIP Solution - Vonage or Packet8 (Dave Close) Re: FAX vs VOIP (Dave Close) Telecom and VOIP (Voice over Internet Protocol) Digest for the Internet. All contents here are copyrighted by Patrick Townson and the individual writers/correspondents. Articles may be used in other journals or newsgroups, provided the writer's name and the Digest are included in the fair use quote. By using -any name or email address- included herein for -any- reason other than responding to an article herein, you agree to pay a hundred dollars to the recipients of the email. =========================== Addresses herein are not to be added to any mailing list, nor to be sold or given away without explicit written consent. Chain letters, viruses, porn, spam, and miscellaneous junk are definitely unwelcome. We must fight spam for the same reason we fight crime: not because we are naive enough to believe that we will ever stamp it out, but because we do not want the kind of world that results when no one stands against crime. Geoffrey Welsh =========================== See the bottom of this issue for subscription and archive details and the name of our lawyer; other stuff of interest. ---------------------------------------------------------------------- From: Lisa Minter Subject: Napster Entering Ringtone Market Date: Fri, 10 Dec 2004 14:10:26 EST LOS ANGELES (Reuters) - Online music service Napster on Thursday said it reached a deal to enter the ringtone market with mobile content publisher Dwango Wireless. The "Napster Mobile" service will offer wireless customers access to ringtones, using an integrated technology extending from the PC to mobile devices. The service, scheduled to launch in the U.S. and Canada in 2005, will let Napster Mobile customers choose ringtones from a song catalog and earn credits for Napster's online music service. From time to time, Napster will send out promotional codes through the users' phones redeemable for discounts on subscriptions or download credits on Napster's service. Napster is a unit of Roxio Inc. NOTE: For more telecom/internet/networking/computer news from the daily media, check out our feature 'Telecom Digest Extra' each day at http://telecom-digest.org/td-extra . New articles daily. *** FAIR USE NOTICE. This message contains copyrighted material the use of which has not been specifically authorized by the copyright owner. This Internet discussion group is making it available without profit to group members who have expressed a prior interest in receiving the included information in their efforts to advance the understanding of literary, educational, political, and economic issues, for non-profit research and educational purposes only. I believe that this constitutes a 'fair use' of the copyrighted material as provided for in section 107 of the U.S. Copyright Law. If you wish to use this copyrighted material for purposes of your own that go beyond 'fair use,' you must obtain permission from the copyright owner, in this instance Yahoo News. For more information go to: http://www.law.cornell.edu/uscode/17/107.shtml ------------------------------ From: Lisa Minter Subject: Yahoo to Begin Testing Desktop Search in January Date: Fri, 10 Dec 2004 14:14:45 EST By Lisa Baertlein SAN FRANCISCO (Reuters) - Yahoo Inc. said on Thursday it will begin testing a free desktop search service in early January, following rivals hoping to extend the reach of wildly profitable search-related advertising. Desktop search, which helps excavate information buried on computer hard drives, is seen as the next frontier in the booming search sector that has generated billions in revenues from ads generated by Web search queries. Yahoo's product will use licensed technology from Pasadena, California- based X1 Technologies Inc. to help users search e-mail and a variety of files -- from photos and music to PDF-format documents -- on their hard drives. Those search capabilities also will be integrated with Yahoo's own Web search technology, said Jeff Weiner, senior vice president of Yahoo's search and marketplace business. Sunnyvale, California-based Yahoo expects to roll out rapid updates to its desktop service, which will eventually allow users to search even more of the Web -- including content from Yahoo chat groups, address book and instant messaging archives. Web search leader Google Inc., Yahoo's biggest rival, launched its test desktop search service in October. Software giant Microsoft Corp., whose Windows operating system runs on more than 90 percent of the world's personal computers, bought a desktop search business in July and has said it will launch its own desktop search engine by year-end. Ask Jeeves Inc. bought desktop search company Tukaroo Inc. in June and also has said it will launch sometime this month. Desktop search products are expected from AOL and Apple Computer Inc., too. Yahoo, Google, Ask Jeeves and Microsoft's MSN Internet division each rely on Web-search advertising to drive profits. NOTE: For more telecom/internet/networking/computer news from the daily media, check out our feature 'Telecom Digest Extra' each day at http://telecom-digest.org/td-extra . New articles daily. *** FAIR USE NOTICE. This message contains copyrighted material the use of which has not been specifically authorized by the copyright owner. This Internet discussion group is making it available without profit to group members who have expressed a prior interest in receiving the included information in their efforts to advance the understanding of literary, educational, political, and economic issues, for non-profit research and educational purposes only. I believe that this constitutes a 'fair use' of the copyrighted material as provided for in section 107 of the U.S. Copyright Law. If you wish to use this copyrighted material for purposes of your own that go beyond 'fair use,' you must obtain permission from the copyright owner, in this instance Reuters News Service. For more information go to: http://www.law.cornell.edu/uscode/17/107.shtml ------------------------------ From: Lisa Minter Subject: Yahoo! News Story - Supreme Court to Decide Grokster Case Date: Sat, 11 Dec 2004 12:27:55 EST By Andy Sullivan WASHINGTON (Reuters) - The U.S. Supreme Court on Friday agreed to consider whether Internet file-trading networks should be held responsible when their users copy music, movies and other protected works without permission. Online networks like Grokster and Morpheus allow millions of computer users to copy music and movies for free from each others' hard drives. Recording labels and movie studios say that cuts into their sales. But the Ninth Circuit Court of Appeals ruled in August that peer-to- peer networks cannot be held liable for copyright infringement because, like a videocassette recorder, they can be used for legiti- mate purposes as well. Even as record labels challenge the appeals court's decision, they are tentatively embracing peer-to-peer networks as a way to cut distribution costs and reach out to listeners. By the time the Supreme Court hears the case next spring, all four major labels -- Vivendi Universal, EMI Group Plc, Sony BMG Music Entertainment and privately held Warner Music -- could be distributing their songs over a new generation of peer-to-peer networks like Snocap and Mashboxx that promise to collect payment for songs. The court is expected to issue a decision by June. Entertainment-industry trade groups said Grokster and other rogue networks need to be shut down if industry-sanctioned services like Snocap and Apple Computer Inc.'s iTunes can flourish. "Without strong rules of the road, there will never be a level playing field for the multitude of legitimate online music services trying to do the right thing," said Mitch Bainwol, chairman of the Recording Industry Association of America. The head of a peer-to-peer trade group said the entertainment industry would be better off negotiating with his members rather than trying to sue them out of existence. "Decentralized peer-to-peer technology will forever be with us even if every presently operating company goes out of business yesterday," said Adam Eisgrau, executive director of P2P United, which counts the parent companies of Grokster and Morpheus among its members. The entertainment industry managed to shut down the first file-trading network, Napster. But Grokster and other networks that have sprung up in its wake claim their decentralized design prevents them from blocking copyrighted songs or otherwise controlling user behavior. While the entertainment industry has been unable so far to shut down peer-to-peer networks through the courts, it has sued more than 5,000 individual users for copyright infringement. The industry has also lobbied Congress for tougher copyright laws and warned peer-to-peer users they may be exposed to computer viruses, unwanted pornography and privacy risks. But traffic on file-trading networks continues to rise. An average of 7.5 million users were logged on to peer-to-peer networks in November 2004, up from 4.4 million in November 2003, according to the research firm BigChampagne. NOTE: For more telecom/internet/networking/computer news from the daily media, check out our feature 'Telecom Digest Extra' each day at http://telecom-digest.org/td-extra . New articles daily. *** FAIR USE NOTICE. This message contains copyrighted material the use of which has not been specifically authorized by the copyright owner. This Internet discussion group is making it available without profit to group members who have expressed a prior interest in receiving the included information in their efforts to advance the understanding of literary, educational, political, and economic issues, for non-profit research and educational purposes only. I believe that this constitutes a 'fair use' of the copyrighted material as provided for in section 107 of the U.S. Copyright Law. If you wish to use this copyrighted material for purposes of your own that go beyond 'fair use,' you must obtain permission from the copyright owner, in this instance Reuters News Service. For more information go to: http://www.law.cornell.edu/uscode/17/107.shtml ------------------------------ From: Rick Merrill Subject: What's VOip With Pictures Called? Organization: Comcast Online Date: Sat, 11 Dec 2004 16:44:29 GMT My guess is that VoIP providers will move towards videophone as soon as feasible. What do you think? - RM [TELECOM Digest Editor's Note: If any sort of universal interchange agreement (on handling each other's traffic) gets started, then I agree this 'VOIP-CAM' application will be a winner. Bell never did get too far along with videophone -- in terms of popular usage -- but I think we live in a different era now. PAT] ------------------------------ From: NOTvalid@surplus4actors.INFO Subject: Re: Calling Card Needed -- Short Interaction Sequence Date: 11 Dec 2004 09:00:45 -0800 Organization: http://groups.google.com Even OneSuite charges 55 cents from payphone. But for that 55 cents you can make multiple successive calls. As far a "Short Interaction Sequence", if you frequently use same phone, you don't have to use PIN number. You can register that phone on-line as not needing PIN. Incredibly low long distance phone rates, As low as USA-Canada 1.9CPM! Works as prepaid phone card. PIN not needed for calls from home or cell phone. Compare the rates at https://www.onesuite.com/ No monthly fee or minimum. Use promotion code "034720367" for some FREE time. ------------------------------ From: pro_engineer_97@yahoo.com Subject: Re: Sprint, Nextel in Merger Talks Date: 10 Dec 2004 18:53:51 -0800 Organization: http://groups.google.com I have been employed by Sprint PCS in the past, and am currently employed by Nextel. Nextel has excellent benefits, and has a great working environment. They don't just "talk the talk", they truly care about their employees. They will even give you $3,500 to assist with adopting a child. Sprint, on the other hand, has mediocre benefits at best, and treat their employees as "just another number". The news of this merger is a big disappointment to me, and I advise all Nextel employees to get ready for the "shaft". I reactivated my resume on all of the major job boards today. Sprint is not a good place to work. ------------------------------ From: Isaiah Beard Subject: Re: Sprint, Nextel in Talks: Reports Date: Fri, 10 Dec 2004 22:34:35 -0500 Eric Friedebach wrote: > Sprint Corp. and Nextel Communications Inc. are in merger discussions, > according to press reports. I've said this in quite a few forums, and I'll say it here: that anyone would THINK of merging these two companies defies any reasonable logic. The two networks that are run by Nextel (iDEN) and Sprint (CDMA 2000 1x) have very little in common, offer a very different feature set, and are completely and entirely incompatible with each other. Invariably, a merger would require a cost savings to work out, and that would inevitably mean integrating the two networks ... something which would be a total nightmare, and would mean that at least half of the user base would be angered that their feature set would be lost in favor of the other. Not to mention the expense involved in swapping out customer equipment in order to permit this integration (and considering the Sprint's top of the line "smart" phones cost upwards of $600 and Nextel's top of the line models are upwards of $400, they had BETTER have a plan in place to make sure the phones either compatible with the integrated network, or that they are replaced with comparable equipment that IS compatible). With Cingular and AT&T, the "synergy" of a merger was easy to see: both networks were similar, used the same standards, and even had the same lineage (started out AMPS, switched to TDMA, and evolving to GSM/EDGE). No equipment swapout is necessary because the equipment is largely the same. With Sprint and Nextel, there is no such synergy, and I would seriously doubt the long- or even medium-term viability of the merged entity. E-mail fudged to thwart spammers. Transpose the c's and a's in my e-mail address to reply. ------------------------------ Date: Fri, 10 Dec 2004 22:00:35 -0500 From: Ron Chapman Subject: Re: Radar Detectors In article , Justin Time wrote: >> b) change the timing of the lights with such devices, in order to >> DRAMATICALLY shorten the time of the yellow light, a change which >> drastically increases the likelihood of your getting caught by the >> device? > Now this is a bold statement with no proof to your allegation. I didn't list the proof, but it's been proven time and again to my satisfaction. And when the municipalities in question are confronted with this proof, they act like a convenience store robber faced with film from the security camera -- they just shrug and shut up. > While I am not saying that retiming of traffic lights hasn't > occurred, can you cite some specific examples of cities where this > has been done? From http://www.namic.org/regulatorykeyissues/redlight.asp : > And, in July 2001, U.S. House Majority Leader Dick Armey (R-TX), > testifying before the House Subcommittee on Highways and Transit, > said red light cameras have become profitable in some communities, > where the timing of yellow light traffic signals is shortened to the > point of where more drivers are caught running red lights. Armey > suggested that this could be explained in part by local > jurisdictions that lease camera equipment from private contractors > who are paid a percentage of each fine that is levied. motorists.com is also a good site. And this is pretty damning for the city of San Diego: http://tinyurl.com/68qqs Go to Google and do a search using the terms red light cameras timing and you'll come up with the same things I'm seeing right now. You may also want to contact Pat Bedard and Car and Driver magazine. He has the absolute facts to back all this up. > I know that in the city where I work, one unit was removed because > it was found to be installed at an intersection where the light was > improperly timed to allow traffic to clear an intersection before > the light at the next intersection turned red. That says nothing about the timing of the yellow light; it speaks only to the timing of one light turning red and the other light turning green. When the yellow light is shortened, people that were law-abiding yesterday became criminals today -- and they didn't do a thing to change their behavior. Moreover, they were never told about the timing change. It's about revenue generation, period. [TELECOM Digest Editor's Note: We have a situation where a sort of busy street runs parallel to railroad tracks with rather high speed trains. At an intersection where a cross street first crosses the railroad tracks then just a few feet further also crosses the busy street, they have the stop/go light synched to change when the bell starts ringing/the red light flashes/the crossing gate starts going down. The stop/go lights are on their own timing, but the very instant the railroad starts signalling a train is coming through (by flashing red lights/bell/gate about to drop) the busy street goes to yellow for a second or two, then to red. Objective: get stopped cars out of the intersection and off the tracks on the cross street before the gates go down and conceivably trap a car on the railroad tracks. On the cross street, in addition to a stop/go light right at the intersection (where it is too 'close for comfort' to the railroad track crossing) there is a 'supplementary' stop/go light a few feet *before* you get on the tracks, and if *it* goes to red you are expected to stop there, of course, but if it was green or starting to change to yellow as you traveled the roughly two or three car lengths and then went red before you got across the intersection, you are expected to stop at the other light; in other words keep the tracks clear if possible, but if a train is coming, then the light changes in a second or two to get *you* off the tracks and out of the way, even if the busy street had just a few seconds earlier gotten a green, it goes back to yellow >> red. PAT] ------------------------------ From: Tim@Backhome.org Subject: Re: Radar Detectors Date: Sat, 11 Dec 2004 05:12:45 -0800 Organization: Cox Communications hancock4@bbs.cpcn.com wrote: > I wish the cops didn't need cameras and speed traps, but motorists > have only themselves to blame. An automatic speed timing/enforcement device that permits up to 39 in a 25 mph zone is hardly a speed trap. That is a generous buffer. I am presuming the 25 mph limit is justified, which it usually is in a residential setting. [TELECOM Digest Editor's Note: When traveling south on Pennsylvania Avenue (highway 75 here) the stop/go lights are timed in such a way that if you make one light, and *travel at the right speed* you can make all the lights all the way downtown. On the other hand, miss one light, and you miss them all. PAT] ------------------------------ From: Tony P" Subject: Re: Radar Detectors Organization: ATCC Date: Sat, 11 Dec 2004 13:18:00 -0500 In article , Tim@Backhome.org says: > Bitu wrote: >> I have tested the spray myself. I triggered one of these nasty cameras >> intentionally one early morning when there was nobody around. I saw the >> flash go off but I have yet to receive any tickets. It is a nice >> feeling to know that I am not driving naked. These cameras are not for >> safety they are all about revenue. I have donated enough money to the >> local police department. They are not going to get me again for driving >> 5 miles over the speed limit. > The automatic devices for slight speed violations are revenue devices > for the most part. But, the devices that catch red light runners > serve a genuine safety purposes. In Southern California there just > aren't enough traffic cops. And, side collisions at intersections > because one car ran the red light is about the leading cause of > traffic deaths in the region these days. But then you get those communities that play with the yellow light timing in order to crank up the counts of red light runners. If communities played fair I wouldn't have a problem with red light cameras and in fact would welcome them. But until they do, I don't want to see them in my city which by the way they already are but not in the places where they would do the most good. In article , hancock4@bbs.cpcn.com says: > Ron Chapman wrote: >> Ah. So maybe you can explain to me why cities that employ these >> devices: >> (a) pay nothing for them, and receive commissions from the PRIVATE >> OPERATORS who place them; and > That is not true. The cost of the machines is deducted from the net > revenue of the fines received. > Everybody supposedly thinks its good when govt "privitizes", and here > is an example of govt doing just that. >> (b) change the timing of the lights with such devices, in order to >> DRAMATICALLY shorten the time of the yellow light, a change which >> drastically increases the likelihood of your getting caught by the >> device? > I find that very hard to believe. > As as the claim of "revenue enhancement", allow me to note: > 1) One city is installing the cameras at intersections with a > seriously high accident rate. I'm familiar with these intersections, > and motorists routinely keep going even after the yellow goes to red. > In other words, these aren't questionable instances, but rather the > motorists entered the intersection clearly after their light went to > red. The sloppy driving of motorists brought this enforcement onto > themselves. > 2) My own town set up a speed trap and I watched it work. The speed > limit was 25 mph on a narrow residential street and prominently > posted. They set the flag cutoff at 40 mph. Despite it being 40, > they still cited many drivers flying through. I live next door to a parking lot and watch the police setup their speed and violation traps in there. I was talking to one of them a few nights ago and told him he's in the wrong spot, that if they moved the trap about 3 blocks away they'd bag a lot more speeders. So now there are two of them and sure enough, they're tagging left and right. But my city is becoming car hostile what with the addition of 1,900 more parking meters, and finally enforcement of the no parking within 20' of an intersection rule. ------------------------------ From: Steve Sobol Subject: Re: Automatic Number Identification (ANI) Service Date: Sat, 11 Dec 2004 09:47:03 -0800 Organization: Glorb Internet Services, http://www.glorb.com Michael Quinn Michael wrote: > When I called the number to see who it was, it was an automated "voice > messaging center" (no further info was provided) which gives an option > to be removed from their call list. If that option is selected, it > reads back the number from which one is calling. Worked from home as > well as inside an ISDN PABX at my office. Who knows how long it will > be in service, so TD subcribers may wish to take advantage of while > it's there. Or you could be smart and not trust "remove" numbers. JustThe.net Internet & New Media Services, http://JustThe.net/ Steven J. Sobol, Geek In Charge / 888.480.4NET (4638) / sjsobol@JustThe.net PGP Key available from your friendly local key server (0xE3AE35ED) Apple Valley, California Nothing scares me anymore. I have three kids. ------------------------------ Date: Fri, 10 Dec 2004 23:57:28 -0500 From: Fred Goldstein Subject: Re: Question About ROLM PBX Telephones In V23 I590, phoneguide@gmail.com > ROLM was originally an IBM CBX / PBX voice switching venture that was > in North America's arrival was purchased away from the German company > SEIMENS. IBM made many advancements and improvements to the systems > proprietary operating system and architecture (Americanizing it). IBM > later sold the ROLM CBX / PBX product back to SEIMENS for a handsome > profit. That wasn't exactly how it happened. I was a BIG ROLM customer in the late 1970s and early 1980s, beta tested their LCBX, and supervised a bunch of them later. Interesting story, actually. The company (the name was formed from the first letters of the four founders' surnames, btw) was founded in Santa Clara 1969 or so. Its first product line was a range of mil-spec computers based on Data General's then-popular Nova 16-bit minicomputers. The FCC had just authorized PBX competition in 1969, after decades of monopoly. A few years later, ROLM needed a new PBX for itself and didn't like what was on the market -- most systems in 1973 were either electromechanical crossbars or wired-logic relays; the earliest electronic PBXs were not very well made. So they designed their own, creating a new product line. The first ROLM CBX came out in 1975. Within a few years, it went through several major software releases, adding lots of features. The early machines supported regular electromechanical keysets by means of an electronic deskside adapter -- it was not terribly successful though. In early 1979, with Release 5, they introduced a real electronic phone, the ETS-100. It had nice feature buttons and primitive Caller ID, showing the 4-digit calling extension number. That was a *real* shocker to callers -- I had one of the first on my desk at BBN, where I was in charge of the new LCBX. A few years later, they introduced the Rolmphone series. The original CBX suffered from a short-sighted design decision. In 1975, there were no cheap 64 kbps codec chips. So to save money, they designed the system around a 144 kbps codec, which could have much cheaper filters (12 kHz sampling instead of 8 kHz meant it could have gentler rolloff). Line cards came in "interface groups" of three boards: One line interface, one coder, and one decoder. A 3-cabinet system could hold about 800 lines, depending on the mix of trunks. It was huge by today's standards, but more compact than the electromechanical switches that it replaced. Norther Telecom came out with its SL-1 at about the same time, using standard 64 kbps coding. Well, by 1978, 64 kbps codec chips were mass-produced and cheap, so the SL-1 kept getting cheaper to build, unlike the CBX. By 1983 or so, T1 trunk interfaces were becoming available, and ROLM's design needed *six* boards and half a shelf to do one, recoding 64 kbps to 144 and back! And the new Rolmphones were 64 kbps too. ROLM was in crisis, but kept it quiet. Along came IBM, who bought into the company around 1984, buying it all a couple of years later. They paid too much ... the whole design had to be redone. Not only the 144 kbps codecs, but the main software too was obsolete. The original CBX code was very tight (bit-bummed) embedded code, hard to maintain. The multi-node VLCBX, shipped around 1982 (about two years late), had an improved code base, but was still no gem. IBM had its work cut out for it. They updated the CBX into the 8750, and came out with a new 9750 with more backplane capacity. Redwood was the baby version. But the "integrated voice/data" fad (VoIP is the same basic idea, albeit in reverse) was over, and IBM discovered that they didn't need a PBX in their product line. So they sold the whole thing to Siemens (at a big loss), who eventually phased out the native ROLM products in favor of designs based on their German HICOM systems. ISDN was a big deal in Germany and HICOM was designed from the ground up for ISDN. It wasn't a huge hit in the States and indeed Siemens/ROLM declined in market share. ------------------------------ Date: 11 Dec 2004 05:45:38 -0000 From: John Levine Subject: Re: Vonage, VoicePulse Push Forward With Video Organization: I.E.C.C., Trumansburg NY USA >> Within the space of a few hours, two separate New Jersey-based Voice >> over Internet Protocol providers announced their intention to move >> forcefully into relatively uncharted space: the video telephone. > Does anybody care? Will anybody actually use it? Packet8 has been offering video all along. I can't say that it seems to have taken the world by storm. If all of the VoIP carriers agreed to interoperate so you could call anyone's videophone from anyone else's, there might be a chance of getting to critical mass. Fat chance. John R. Levine, IECC, POB 727, Trumansburg NY 14886 +1 607 330 5711 johnl@iecc.com, Mayor, http://johnlevine.com, Member, Provisional board, Coalition Against Unsolicited Commercial E-mail ------------------------------ From: Michael D. Sullivan Subject: Re: How to Call from A to B to C? Please Help Date: Sat, 11 Dec 2004 07:47:29 GMT In article , marc_nospam@ldezign.com says: > Hi, > I'm currently working on a venture possibility in my small town that > is an hour away from a major City. > Placing call to that major city(town A) is a long distance from my > town (town B). But a town in between (town C) is not a long distance > for both ends. > People would call from town A to town C and reach town B without any > additional charge besides the monthly charge from the services of my > own company. > That software would have to accept 2 set of entry from the clients > touch tone phone: first entry would be some unique client code and the > second entry would be the 10 digits phone number to town B. > From there the call would be made allowing a bridge to be made > between the two intended cities. > I was wondering if anyone knows what it would require technically to > achieve such thing. I don't even know how many incomming line would > be required for this project. > Hope anyone can help. If you are planning to charge for this service, you will become an intrastate (assuming A, B, and C are in the same state) long-distance carrier. You will need to pay for "intrastate special access" lines for both the incoming and the outgoing lines. You will need to disable the capability for a caller to make local calls in city C, or you will have to pay a special access surcharge. You will probably need to apply to the PUC for a certificate of public convenience and necessity, you may need to file tariffs, you will need to pay a whole lot of taxes to the feds and the state/local authorities, and you will need to file FCC form 499Q quarterly and 499A annually, which will also obligate you to pay USF charges. And you would become subject to a variety of state and federal regulations, such as the need to file annual EEO reports. Of course, you can pass all of these costs through to your customers, at which point you won't have any, because the intrastate toll for dialing 10 digits won't be much more than the charges for using your service, which will require dialing 7 or 10 digits, a customer code, and another 10 digits. If you don't jump through all the hoops, expect your local phone company to deny your line requests and/or file an FCC/PUC complaint for toll diversion and failure to comply with carrier obligations. If you aren't going to charge for this service, g*d bless you, but why would you be paying for all the lines and the software and hardware to do this, just so businesses in the next town could stiff the Bell on tolls? Michael D. Sullivan Bethesda, MD, USA Delete nospam from my address and it won't work. ------------------------------ From: dave@compata.com (Dave Close) Subject: Re: Dropping SBC For a VoIP Solution -- Vonage or Packet8 ?? Date: 10 Dec 2004 22:26:10 -0800 Organization: Compata, Costa Mesa, California Rick Merrill writes: > You wired it up wrong, and I'll try to say why. It should be > Modem<>TelephoneAdapter<>Router<>PC > Then the TA does "QOS"(quality of service) to reduce the through put > so that voice quality is maintained (downloads via the router are > slowed). Also, it means that you do not have to enable DHCP on the > router unless you want it. Your system may work for some folks, so long as the TA has two jacks. But not for everyone. I have a static address and my provider does no DHCP, so they could not give an address to a TA. My DHCP server is inside my LAN, not on the router, and the router blocks DHCP requests from outside. So there is no way I could put the TA between my router and the network as it would be unable to acquire an address. When I asked Vonage about this situation, their response was that QoS doesn't work anyway, so just put the TA inside. I did and it works fine. Dave Close, Compata, Costa Mesa CA "Politics is the business of getting dave@compata.com, +1 714 434 7359 power and privilege without dhclose@alumni.caltech.edu possessing merit." - P. J. O'Rourke ------------------------------ From: dave@compata.com (Dave Close) Subject: Re: FAX vs VOIP Date: 10 Dec 2004 22:28:07 -0800 Organization: Compata, Costa Mesa, California Tim@Backhome.org writes: > My 3-year old FAX machine works fine on my Vonage service. Sending or receiving? Vonage, for example, provides support for incoming fax calls, especially if you notify them. But when I've tried sending, my fax generally is unable to sync with the destination machine. Dave Close, Compata, Costa Mesa CA +1 714 434 7359 dave@compata.com dhclose@alumni.caltech.edu "Political campaigns are the graveyard of real ideas and the birthplace of empty promises." -- Teresa Heinz Kerry ------------------------------ TELECOM Digest is an electronic journal devoted mostly but not exclusively to telecommunications topics. It is circulated anywhere there is email, in addition to various telecom forums on a variety of networks such as Compuserve and America On Line, Yahoo Groups, and other forums. It is also gatewayed to Usenet where it appears as the moderated newsgroup 'comp.dcom.telecom'. TELECOM Digest is a not-for-profit, mostly non-commercial educational service offered to the Internet by Patrick Townson. All the contents of the Digest are compilation-copyrighted. You may reprint articles in some other media on an occasional basis, but please attribute my work and that of the original author. Contact information: Patrick Townson/TELECOM Digest Post Office Box 50 Independence, KS 67301 Phone: 620-402-0134 Fax 1: 775-255-9970 Fax 2: 530-309-7234 Fax 3: 208-692-5145 Email: editor@telecom-digest.org Subscribe: telecom-subscribe@telecom-digest.org Unsubscribe:telecom-unsubscribe@telecom-digest.org This Digest is the oldest continuing e-journal about telecomm- unications on the Internet, having been founded in August, 1981 and published continuously since then. Our archives are available for your review/research. We believe we are the oldest e-zine/mailing list on the internet in any category! URL information: http://telecom-digest.org Anonymous FTP: mirror.lcs.mit.edu/telecom-archives/archives/ (or use our mirror site: ftp.epix.net/pub/telecom-archives) Email <==> FTP: telecom-archives@telecom-digest.org Send a simple, one line note to that automated address for a help file on how to use the automatic retrieval system for archives files. You can get desired files in email. ************************************************************************* * TELECOM Digest is partially funded by a grant from * * Judith Oppenheimer, President of ICB Inc. and purveyor of accurate * * 800 & Dot Com News, Intelligence, Analysis, and Consulting. * * http://ICBTollFree.com, http://1800TheExpert.com * * Views expressed herein should not be construed as representing * * views of Judith Oppenheimer or ICB Inc. * ************************************************************************* ICB Toll Free News. Contact information is not sold, rented or leased. One click a day feeds a person a meal. Go to http://www.thehungersite.com Copyright 2004 ICB, Inc. and TELECOM Digest. All rights reserved. Our attorney is Bill Levant, of Blue Bell, PA. ************************ DIRECTORY ASSISTANCE JUST 65 CENTS ONE OR TWO INQUIRIES CHARGED TO YOUR CREDIT CARD! REAL TIME, UP TO DATE! SPONSORED BY TELECOM DIGEST AND EASY411.COM SIGN UP AT http://www.easy411.com/telecomdigest ! ************************ --------------------------------------------------------------- Finally, the Digest is funded by gifts from generous readers such as yourself who provide funding in amounts deemed appropriate. Your help is important and appreciated. A suggested donation of fifty dollars per year per reader is considered appropriate. See our address above. Please make at least a single donation to cover the cost of processing your name to the mailing list. All opinions expressed herein are deemed to be those of the author. Any organizations listed are for identification purposes only and messages should not be considered any official expression by the organization. End of TELECOM Digest V23 #592 ****************************** From editor@telecom-digest.org Sat Dec 11 19:58:47 2004 Received: (from ptownson@localhost) by massis.lcs.mit.edu (8.11.6p3/8.11.6) id iBC0wlP24410; Sat, 11 Dec 2004 19:58:47 -0500 (EST) Date: Sat, 11 Dec 2004 19:58:47 -0500 (EST) From: editor@telecom-digest.org Message-Id: <200412120058.iBC0wlP24410@massis.lcs.mit.edu> X-Authentication-Warning: massis.lcs.mit.edu: ptownson set sender to editor@telecom-digest.org using -f To: ptownson Approved: patsnewlist Subject: TELECOM Digest V23 #593 TELECOM Digest Sat, 11 Dec 2004 19:58:00 EST Volume 23 : Issue 593 Inside This Issue: Editor: Patrick A. Townson Employment Opportunity: System Manager/Network Administrator (Editor) Re: Cellphones Aloft: The Inevitable is Closer (Thomas A. Horsley) Re: Urban Legends Reference Pages: Politics (Celling)(Danny Burstein) Re: Calling Card Needed -- Short Interaction Sequence (Danny Burstein) Re: Sprint, Nextel in Merger Talks (Steve Sobol) Re: Spint, Nextel in Talks (Joseph) Remembering Kevin Mitnick - 1995, 1997, at Present (Lisa Minter) Telecom and VOIP (Voice over Internet Protocol) Digest for the Internet. All contents here are copyrighted by Patrick Townson and the individual writers/correspondents. Articles may be used in other journals or newsgroups, provided the writer's name and the Digest are included in the fair use quote. By using -any name or email address- included herein for -any- reason other than responding to an article herein, you agree to pay a hundred dollars to the recipients of the email. =========================== Addresses herein are not to be added to any mailing list, nor to be sold or given away without explicit written consent. Chain letters, viruses, porn, spam, and miscellaneous junk are definitely unwelcome. We must fight spam for the same reason we fight crime: not because we are naive enough to believe that we will ever stamp it out, but because we do not want the kind of world that results when no one stands against crime. Geoffrey Welsh =========================== See the bottom of this issue for subscription and archive details and the name of our lawyer; other stuff of interest. ---------------------------------------------------------------------- Date: Sat, 11 Dec 2004 19:09:51 EST From: TELECOM Digest Editor Subject: Employment Opportunity: System Manager/Network Administrator [TELECOM Digest Editor's Note: Here follows a 'help wanted' ad which has appeared in our daily newspaper (Independence Reporter) for more than a week, day after day. Apparently, they are having a little trouble filling the position, so I volunteered to print it here in the Digest to let others know about it. You *do* need to live in the s.e. Kansas area (no law regarding it, etc, but you don't want a long commute.) Neodesha, Kansas is a small town (about 2000 residents); their closest big town is Independence (about 8000 people) and Coffeyville (12,000). It's a rural setting. Neodesha is about 15 miles north of here (a very easy commute; many folks live in Indy and commute to work in Neodesha, (phonetic pronounciation = Nee-ode-a-shay) and vice-versa. People are very laid back and casual around here, and you might be surprised at the inexpensive cost of living. PAT] Now here is the ad which has been running daily in the paper: =============================================== Computer Systems/Network Administrator Leading manufacturer of industrial processing machinery systems used in the forest products and food processing industries has an excellent opportunity for a Computer Systems/Network Administrator. Qualified applicant should be able to respond to employees' questions regarding computer systems, phone problems and technical need; Perform network administration duties for a Windows 2000 Network; Manage user accounts, email accounts, company web site, remote access and regular system backups; Diagnose and resolve server problems; Perform install- ation and maintainence of computers or computer-related hardware and software; Move/reprogram computers and telephones as needed; trouble- shoot equipment usage. B.S. in Computer Science preferred with a strong background in Windows 95/98/NT/2000/XP and Windows 2000 Network. Outstanding Company paid fringe benefits including Life and Long Term Disaility Insurance,401-K Retirement Plan, 9 paid holidays and 1-5 weeks of vacation annually. Health/Vision/Dental Insurance available. Apply at Human Resources 11th and Illinois Streets Neodesha, KS 66767 "MEC Company is an Equal Opportunity Employer" =========================== [TELECOM Digest Editor's Note: I would not expect anyone to drive all the way to Neodesha (from Silicon Valley for example, or even Texas or New York) but I suspect if you sent them a resume stating your credentials/qualifications/requirements, etc they would be happy to look at it if you stated plainly your willingness to relocate to s.e. Kansas, and stating that you *would* come to visit in person if there was any serious interest. The telephone number (which was not included in the ad) is 620-325-2673, and I suppose you *could* call to explain *why* you were not showing up in person at first. They also have an office in Cherryvale, KS and Coffeyville, KS. Tell them you read about the job in the Independence Reporter, via TELECOM Digest. It would be **great** to see one of you guys (otherwise in the mood to be in this area) get the job, and I am **certain** most of you would easily qualify. PAT] ------------------------------ Subject: Re: Cellphones Aloft: The Inevitable is Closer From: tom.horsley@att.net (Thomas A. Horsley) Organization: AT&T Worldnet Date: Sat, 11 Dec 2004 22:23:18 GMT > The picocell linked to several antennas inside a cable that gathered > signals from passengers' cellphones and sent them all to a small > satellite dish, no bigger than a laptop computer, on top of the > plane. From there, the calls were beamed to an orbiting satellite, > which sent the calls back to special cell stations linked to phone > networks on earth. Hey! Maybe they could do the same thing in buildings as well, and we wouldn't have to worry about running over the thousands of people wandering around in parking lots talking on their cellphones because they can't get a signal inside the building :-). >>==>> The *Best* political site >>==+ email: Tom.Horsley@worldnet.att.net icbm: Delray Beach, FL | Free Software and Politics <<==+ ------------------------------ From: Danny Burstein Subject: Re: Urban Legends Reference Pages: Politics (Celling Your Soul) Date: Sat, 11 Dec 2004 22:26:53 UTC Organization: PANIX Public Access Internet and UNIX, NYC In Marcus Didius Falco writes: (I've edited and summarized the key points ) [ snip ] > Starting Jan 1, 2005, all cell phone numbers will be made public to > telemarketing firms. Once again, if you've _ever_ given out your cellphone number to pretty much any business, whether it's your credit card company, or your local tire fix place, or East Cupcake Bar and Detox Camp, your number _is already_ in a database and readily available to a hefty number of telemarketers. And others. > According to the National Do Not Call List, you have until Dec 15, > 2004 to get on the national "Do Not Call List" for cell phones. You > can either call 1-888-382-1222 from the cell phone that you wish to > have put on the "do not call list" or you can do it online at > www.donotcall.gov . You can add any and all numbers whenever you like. There's a lag time before they're in the database, so the earlier the better. > phone directories and directory assistance services, and protections > have been put in place to restrict telemarketing calls to cell phones. Those protections _remain_ in place. > directory information is not supposed to be supplied to telemarketers, > and because FCC regulations already in place block the bulk of > telemarketing calls to cell phones). eyup. > Some versions of the exhortation to cell phone users to add their > names to the Do Not Call Registry erroneously state there is a 15 > December 2004 deadline for getting listed. Says Lois Greisman, the > Federal Trade Commission official who oversees the anti-telemarketing > registry: "There is no deadline; there never has been a deadline to > register." Close enough, but since htere's a lag time before the number you enter gets into the active database, there's no reaason to wait. > 200,000 new numbers a week. Yet in the final week of November 2004, > nearly 1 million new subscribers were added, and in the first week of > December 2004, that figure jumped to 2 million. At this point in time, > 69 million phone numbers are contained in the registry. Which is fascinating compared to how many people, say, voted in the election ... _____________________________________________________ Knowledge may be power, but communications is the key dannyb@panix.com [to foil spammers, my address has been double rot-13 encoded] ------------------------------ From: Danny Burstein Subject: Re: Calling Card Needed -- Short Interaction Sequence Date: Sat, 11 Dec 2004 23:16:07 UTC Organization: PANIX Public Access Internet and UNIX, NYC In NOTvalid@surplus4actors.INFO writes: > Even OneSuite charges 55 cents from payphone. > But for that 55 cents you can make multiple successive calls. Then their billing arrangement is broken. The FCC regs are that the pay phone operator gets their kickback of (usually about $0.30 [a]) for _each_ call. If you (typically) hit the " * " button on the keypad to tell your phonecard service to let you make a second call without having to hangup and redial the whole kit and kaboodle, the FCC regs treat that one as, yes, a second call, with an additional $0.30. [a] there was an FCC request for comments about a year ago regarding raising that number significantly. I glanced around and haven't found the result. Anyone know? thanks. _____________________________________________________ Knowledge may be power, but communications is the key dannyb@panix.com [to foil spammers, my address has been double rot-13 encoded] ------------------------------ From: Steve Sobol Subject: Re: Sprint, Nextel in Merger Talks Date: Sat, 11 Dec 2004 15:23:05 -0800 Organization: Glorb Internet Services, http://www.glorb.com pro_engineer_97@yahoo.com wrote: > I have been employed by Sprint PCS in the past, and am currently > employed by Nextel. Nextel has excellent benefits, and has a great > working environment. They don't just "talk the talk", they truly care > about their employees. They will even give you $3,500 to assist with > adopting a child. FYI, this idiot obviously has an axe to grind -- I don't mind seeing this once, but it's been posted multiple times, the idiot is posting under different names in the cellular newsgroups, etc. JustThe.net Internet & New Media Services, http://JustThe.net/ Steven J. Sobol, Geek In Charge / 888.480.4NET (4638) / sjsobol@JustThe.net PGP Key available from your friendly local key server (0xE3AE35ED) Apple Valley, California Nothing scares me anymore. I have three kids. [TELECOM Digest Editor's Note: Thank you, Steve, for calling this to my attention. PAT] ------------------------------ From: Joseph Subject: Re: Sprint, Nextel in Talks: Reports Date: Sat, 11 Dec 2004 16:45:52 -0800 Reply-To: JoeOfSeattle@yahoo.com On Fri, 10 Dec 2004 22:34:35 -0500, Isaiah Beard wrote: > I've said this in quite a few forums, and I'll say it here: that > anyone would THINK of merging these two companies defies any > reasonable logic. The two networks that are run by Nextel (iDEN) and > Sprint (CDMA 2000 1x) have very little in common, offer a very > different feature set, and are completely and entirely incompatible > with each other. Well, it's not unreasonable to think that Sprint PCS couldn't do just as Telus did in Canada. Telus acquired the Clearnet Mike service which also runs the iDen technology the same as Nextel. Telus simply runs two distinct networks with regular PCS @ 1900 Mhz for their CDMA network and a separate network running iDen for their "Mike" service which is the same SMR type of service that Nextel runs. Among the other things that are attractive about the Nextel service is the fact that it's aimed at business users. Nextel has some of the lowest EBTA figures of any wireless carrier in North America. Make no mistake about it Craig McCaw's baby Nextel is a prize that if won is *very* valuable. ------------------------------ Date: Sat, 11 Dec 2004 19:20:30 EST From: Lisa Minter Subject: Kevin Mitnick Recalled Rummaging around through the Telecom Archives, I found two interesting items on Kevin Mitnick. I wonder if anyone knows what he has been doing since 1997 or whenever he got out of prison. Lisa Minter Date: Thu, 16 Feb 95 11:59:10 CST From: telecom@eecs.nwu.edu (TELECOM Digest Editor) Subject: Kevin Mitnick Captured in Raleigh, NC Kevin Mitnick, who had earned the unofficial title of 'America's Most Wanted Computer Hacker' was arrested Wednesday morning at his home in Raleigh, North Carolina. Mitnick had managed to evade authorities in both Los Angeles and Seattle during the past two years. He was caught through the efforts of one of his latest victims, computer security specialist Tsutomu Shimomura of the San Diego Supercomputer Center. Shimomura was robbed of security programs he had written when his computer was broken into on Christmas Day, about two months ago. But one thing Mitnick apparently had not forseen was that the programs he stole -- and then used -- would be used to help track him down. Shimomura was able to detirmine this past weekend that Mitnick, 31, was connecting through a modem attached to a cellular phone somewhere near Raleigh. Through the cooperation of telcos and cellular companies, authorities were able to track Mitnick to his home early Wednesday morning. Authorities say they hope this latest arrest brings to an end the career of a man who began hacking and phreaking when he was in high school. At one point Mitnick broke into a North American Air Defense Command computer in Colorado. Referring to Mitnick as a 'dangerous computer terrorist', Justice Department spokesman John Russell said the raid was conducted at 1:30 am on the apartment in Raleigh in which Mitnick was living alone under a false name. "His obsession was his downfall," said Deputy United States Marshall Kathy Cunningham in Los Angeles. "His obsession to hack and phreak using cloned cellular phones left us a good trail to follow." Mitnick, who is known by the hacker name 'Condor' says he took that alias after seeing the movie 'Three Days of the Condor' starring Robert Redford as a man on the run from the government. He grew up in Los Angeles, and was convicted there in 1988 after a series of phreaking and hacking incidents which included disconnecting the phone service to Hollywood stars and others. Although initially he was given just a short prison term followed by federal probation, he continued to act out in his self-destructive ways and when his probation officer threatened to revoke his probation and send him to prison, he disconnected her telephone to get even and then ran off! And he is supposed to be a smart guy? In 1989, federal prosecutors in Los Angeles portrayed Mitnick as a brilliant young man 'obsessed with junk food and computers' who infiltrated computer networks and telephone switching systems in the United States and England. Although federal authorities suggested that he had broken into National Security Agency computers, he was never charged with that crime. At one point however, they considered him so dangerous they got a judicial order denying him any use of telephones at all, for fear he would call up a computer and access it using the touchtone buttons on the phone. In the earlier 1988 case, Mitnick agreed to plead guilty to hacking the Digital Equipment Corporation (DEC) computer network and stealing a program. He also pleded guilty to theft of sixteen MCI long distance access codes and using them to make long distance calls. For this, the court's imposition of punishment included several years imprisonment with all but one year suspended, to be followed by federal probation for the remainder of his term. After release from prison, Mitnick began his probation. When his probation officer suggested she would revoke his probation because of his behavior and return him to the penitentiary, his response was to hack the appropriate computer and disconnect her phone service ... he then fled. In the fall of 1992, Mitnick was working for a private investigative firm in Calabasas, California when the FBI was conducting an investigation into the break-ins of Pacific Bell computers. Realizing they were about to close in on him, he fled again ... to surface only yesterday when a man he decided to trifle with -- Tsutomu Shimomura -- decided not to get mad, but instead to get even! Shimomura cooperated very closely with the government to pinpoint Mitnick's whereabouts. On Wednesday, February 15, 1995, Mitnick was taken before a Magistrate in Raleigh, North Carolina where he was arraigned on the charge of violating the terms of his probation in 1988, and new charges of computer fraud in North Carolina. Assistant United States Attorney David Schindler in Los Angeles said additional charges pertaining to Mitnick's actions in San Diego, Seattle and Colorado would also be presented. Citing its belief Mitnick was a danger to the community and likely to flee again if released, the court ordered him held without bail, and once again restricted his unsupervised use of telephones. Mitnick may be a smart man, but he seems to lack some common sense. One does not ever screw around with one's federal probation officer; you don't play with her telephone to get even; you don't run off when she calls you. And when you are on the lam or otherwise, you don't steal from someone like Tsutomu Shimomura. Speaking of whom, Shimomura attended the proceedings in Raleigh on Wednesday. At the end of the hearing as he was being led away, a handcuffed and shackled Mitnick turned to Shimomura, whom he has never met or seen before and said, "Hello, Tsutomu, I respect your skills." Shimomura nodded, then turned his back and walked away. It must be remembered that in the United States, our constitution requires a presumption of innocence on the part of Kevin Mitnick until his guilt is proven to the satisfation of a judge or jury in a court of law. Patrick Townson From: Davew@cris.com (Dave Harrison) Newsgroups: comp.dcom.telecom Subject: Mitnick article Date: 8 Feb 1997 08:45:15 GMT Organization: Concentric Internet Services Lines: 113 [TELECOM Digest Editor's Note: Please note that since this article was submitted, Mitnick has been tried, found guilty and sent to prison, as of July, 1997. PAT] Here's an article I came across in one of our online magazines ... I thought it may be of interest to Digest readers. Note that in a week, Kevin will have been in custody for *two* years and hasn't had a trial date set. The Feds also plan on dragging this out by prosecuting Kevin in multiple jurisdictions because he wouldn't sign a plea bargain. As a sidenote, a few weeks ago, Mitnick was throw in solitary for a weekend and his Walkman was confiscated -- the Feds actually thought he was going to modify it in to a walkie talkie. They also believe he can whistle commands over the phone to remote modems. ----------------------------------------------------------------------- Hacked, Cracked and Phreaked All these idiots," Kevin Mitnick told me when I was researching a book about his notorious network infiltrations. "They put their workstations on the Internet and then they run their [encryption] software on their Unix box, and I just backdoor it [for] their pass phrase." With all their bravado, hackers can make you skeptical about the latest advances in computer security. Sure, encryption, firewalls, intrusion detection programs and digital IDs are all helpful tools, but I'm not one of those expecting a miracle cure. As another former cracker recently told me, "Using encryption doesn't make people smart." Two guys named Kevin with eight years of jail between them -- and counting -- have taught me how the other side thinks. I started getting late-night calls on a pay phone from Kevin Mitnick more than two years ago, when he was on the run from the FBI and a little-known security whiz named Tsutomu Shimomura. Kevin Poulsen may be less notorious, but he's no less intriguing. Charged with everything from espionage to hacking radio giveaways -- he won two Porsches -- Poulsen recently finished a five-year stint in federal jail. Last fall, Mitnick's crimes were hinted at in a federal indictment. Since then I've tracked down some of his purported corporate victims and uncovered a clearer picture. The hacker's real targets were industry giants such as Motorola and NEC. Was their computer security bad? Not really. Did Mitnick teach these multinational corporations some very important lessons? Yes. The major alleged offenses against Mitnick are the misappropriation of the proprietary software of a Who's Who of the high-tech world -- Motorola, Nokia, Fujitsu, Novell and NEC. Eighty million bucks is what these companies lost, the government privately says. Some of the companies say the government is exaggerating, arguing that Mitnick seemed to be in it largely for the thrill. But the danger is clear. A hacker with his skills, hired by competitors or foreign governments, could have easily used his intrusions to steal millions of dollars' worth of secrets. How did Mitnick do it? A source at Motorola alleges Mitnick installed what now seems a dated technique -- a packet sniffer to suck up passwords. He did a little "social engineering," allegedly phoning the company and impersonating executives to trick Motorola out of the information he needed to complete his theft. "He did move a block of code," confirms a Motorola official. "He stole source code." Now, the company has new policies for information given out over the phone. Fortunately for Motorola, the company found "no pattern of abuse or fraud." Mitnick, in other words, didn't damage their computers, and as far as they could discern, had no plan to sell their code. In Motorola's defense, sniffers were still new at the time, and Mitnick was a gifted social engineer. The subsequent victims had fewer excuses. Months later, another major cellular phone maker was hit. "By then everybody knew about packet sniffers," says one of the victims. Everybody, it seemed, except for the victimized corporation. Again, they were lucky. Although Mitnick swiped the source code that operates their cellular phone and other wireless products, he didn't seem interested in money or wreaking havoc. Technically, there was no excuse for the success of Mitnick's attacks, because products to combat them were already widely available. But there's frequently a time gap between the latest hacking methods and how quickly companies respond with fixes. Countless Internet mailing lists and World Wide Web sites are posted weekly, highlighting new operating system bugs that could provide access. Staying secure is a fast-moving target. Hackers study and share the vulnerabilities more thoroughly than most security professionals. If you don't patch it in days, you may be the next victim. It's tempting to think that prepacked encryption and other technical innovations will eliminate these risks. But then I remember Mitnick telling me how frequently companies make mistakes in deploying such tools, things as simple as forgetting to delete decrypted messages. And there's another, more subtle problem. Often, the more technology corporations buy, the more they develop an aura of invincibility, an aura the Kevin Mitnicks of the world love to pierce. Pressure to join the Internet and the Web creates another dilemma. The Web may be the future, but its general absence of security is spinning us back into a hacker's Wild West. In the last few months, Web sites for the Air Force, the Department of Justice and the CIA have been hacked and plastered with graffiti. Topless pics of "Friends" TV stars aren't the images the Justice Department wants to portray to the public. Imagine the worst that might show up on your company's window to the public. It's tempting to think technology and the government's tough line on hacking will rid our networks of crime. But consider what the CIA recently told Congress: Hacker terrorists, warned the CIA's director, could execute a strike against our telecommunication and information infrastructure with the destructive force of a nuclear attack. Remember Kevin Poulsen? He wrote a program that ran on Pacific Bell's computers and tipped him off to nearly every FBI wiretap in the state of California. He found mob taps, DEA taps and national security taps. And he could wiretap whomever he wished. Just a kid with no high school diploma, without a political agenda. Imagine what the really scary criminals are doing. Jonathan Littman is a free-lance writer in Mill Valley, Calif., who writes and speaks about computer security. He is the author of "The Fugitive Game" and the upcoming "The Watchman: The Twisted Life and Crimes of Serial Hacker Kevin Poulsen." ---------------- So, I guess I am curious: What is Kevin Mitnick doing these days? Lisa Minter ------------------------------ TELECOM Digest is an electronic journal devoted mostly but not exclusively to telecommunications topics. It is circulated anywhere there is email, in addition to various telecom forums on a variety of networks such as Compuserve and America On Line, Yahoo Groups, and other forums. It is also gatewayed to Usenet where it appears as the moderated newsgroup 'comp.dcom.telecom'. TELECOM Digest is a not-for-profit, mostly non-commercial educational service offered to the Internet by Patrick Townson. All the contents of the Digest are compilation-copyrighted. You may reprint articles in some other media on an occasional basis, but please attribute my work and that of the original author. Contact information: Patrick Townson/TELECOM Digest Post Office Box 50 Independence, KS 67301 Phone: 620-402-0134 Fax 1: 775-255-9970 Fax 2: 530-309-7234 Fax 3: 208-692-5145 Email: editor@telecom-digest.org Subscribe: telecom-subscribe@telecom-digest.org Unsubscribe:telecom-unsubscribe@telecom-digest.org This Digest is the oldest continuing e-journal about telecomm- unications on the Internet, having been founded in August, 1981 and published continuously since then. Our archives are available for your review/research. We believe we are the oldest e-zine/mailing list on the internet in any category! URL information: http://telecom-digest.org Anonymous FTP: mirror.lcs.mit.edu/telecom-archives/archives/ (or use our mirror site: ftp.epix.net/pub/telecom-archives) Email <==> FTP: telecom-archives@telecom-digest.org Send a simple, one line note to that automated address for a help file on how to use the automatic retrieval system for archives files. You can get desired files in email. ************************************************************************* * TELECOM Digest is partially funded by a grant from * * Judith Oppenheimer, President of ICB Inc. and purveyor of accurate * * 800 & Dot Com News, Intelligence, Analysis, and Consulting. * * http://ICBTollFree.com, http://1800TheExpert.com * * Views expressed herein should not be construed as representing * * views of Judith Oppenheimer or ICB Inc. * ************************************************************************* ICB Toll Free News. Contact information is not sold, rented or leased. One click a day feeds a person a meal. Go to http://www.thehungersite.com Copyright 2004 ICB, Inc. and TELECOM Digest. All rights reserved. Our attorney is Bill Levant, of Blue Bell, PA. ************************ DIRECTORY ASSISTANCE JUST 65 CENTS ONE OR TWO INQUIRIES CHARGED TO YOUR CREDIT CARD! REAL TIME, UP TO DATE! SPONSORED BY TELECOM DIGEST AND EASY411.COM SIGN UP AT http://www.easy411.com/telecomdigest ! ************************ --------------------------------------------------------------- Finally, the Digest is funded by gifts from generous readers such as yourself who provide funding in amounts deemed appropriate. Your help is important and appreciated. A suggested donation of fifty dollars per year per reader is considered appropriate. See our address above. Please make at least a single donation to cover the cost of processing your name to the mailing list. All opinions expressed herein are deemed to be those of the author. Any organizations listed are for identification purposes only and messages should not be considered any official expression by the organization. End of TELECOM Digest V23 #593 ****************************** From editor@telecom-digest.org Sun Dec 12 17:43:43 2004 Received: (from ptownson@localhost) by massis.lcs.mit.edu (8.11.6p3/8.11.6) id iBCMhhj06187; Sun, 12 Dec 2004 17:43:43 -0500 (EST) Date: Sun, 12 Dec 2004 17:43:43 -0500 (EST) From: editor@telecom-digest.org Message-Id: <200412122243.iBCMhhj06187@massis.lcs.mit.edu> X-Authentication-Warning: massis.lcs.mit.edu: ptownson set sender to editor@telecom-digest.org using -f To: ptownson Approved: patsnewlist Subject: TELECOM Digest V23 #594 TELECOM Digest Sun, 12 Dec 2004 17:44:00 EST Volume 23 : Issue 594 Inside This Issue: Editor: Patrick A. Townson Entrenched Interests Vrs Disruptive Technology (delete 'z' for address) Spammer With a Toll Free Number and Really Big BALLS (Shlichter1) Telemarketing to Cell Phones (jmeissen@aracnet.com) Re: Western Electric and Al Capone (Jim Haynes) Re: Sprint, Nextel in Merger Talks (Tony P.) Re: FAX vs VOIP (DevilsPGD) Re: Radar Detectors (DevilsPGD) Re: Urban Legends Reference Pages: (Celling Your Soul) (Dave VanHorn) Re: What's VOip With Pictures Called? (Tony P.) Re: Calling Card Needed -- Short Interaction Sequence (DevilsPGD) Re: Calling Card Needed -- Short Interaction Sequence (Clark Griswold) Re: Cellphones Aloft: The Inevitable is Closer (John Levine) Re: Radar Detectors (David Clayton) Re: Vonage Voice Quality Getting Worse? (Pete Romfh) Re: EarthLink High Speed Internet Service Ranked Highest (L Smithson) Re: Kevin Mitnick Recalled (Danny Burstein) Re: Kevin Mitnick Recalled (John Levine) Telecom and VOIP (Voice over Internet Protocol) Digest for the Internet. All contents here are copyrighted by Patrick Townson and the individual writers/correspondents. Articles may be used in other journals or newsgroups, provided the writer's name and the Digest are included in the fair use quote. By using -any name or email address- included herein for -any- reason other than responding to an article herein, you agree to pay a hundred dollars to the recipients of the email. =========================== Addresses herein are not to be added to any mailing list, nor to be sold or given away without explicit written consent. Chain letters, viruses, porn, spam, and miscellaneous junk are definitely unwelcome. We must fight spam for the same reason we fight crime: not because we are naive enough to believe that we will ever stamp it out, but because we do not want the kind of world that results when no one stands against crime. Geoffrey Welsh =========================== See the bottom of this issue for subscription and archive details and the name of our lawyer; other stuff of interest. ---------------------------------------------------------------------- From: Walter Dnes (delete 'z' to get address) Subject: Entrenched Interests Versus Disruptive Technology Date: 12 Dec 2004 17:04:08 GMT Reply-To: see_my_sig_at_bottom_of_message@waltdnes.org On Thu, 9 Dec 2004 23:38:11 -0500, Ron Chapman, wrote: > Books, by their very nature, are wrought from processes that distill > the crap out and leave hard-considered facts and opinions. But on the > net, all it takes is one crazy to set up a "the Holocaust was a fake" > blog -- and how does a ten year old know how to interpret that? He > doesn't. But he reads it on the net ... so does he just go ahead and > use that as "fact" to back up his assignment? > It's all about EDITING. > Now, maybe if my kid's research was done online using only EDITED > resources, resources that have been through the same excruciating > processes that produce printed books, that would be fine. 100% taurine excrement. "The Protocols of the Elders of Zion" is a published book that's been around for a century. "Mein Kampf" is another book that was published long before the internet came into existance. Would you accept them as authoritative if some kid used them as sources for his homework assignment??? > Unedited information makes for dangerous waters. It requires at the > least parental coaching to help the child become a well-rounded and > educated netizen. One should NOT leave the child alone to use the > naked net to finish an assignment. My parents could leave me in the > library by myself to do that, and I could leave my kid in the library > today, but not on the net. Not alone and without guidance. When someone once complained that 90% of science fiction was crud, Theodore Sturgeon shot back that 90% of *EVERYTHING* was crud. This is popularly known as "Sturgeon's Law". He was generally right, although some people might argue that 90% is a conservative number. Children need to be taught critical thinking and to critically examine *ALL* "facts", regardless of where those alleged facts are found, regardless of whether it's on the web or in a "respected publication". Now to get onto the topic of my subject ... when a new technology comes out that undermines entrenched interests using old tech, the old entrenched interests will fight tooth-and-nail to destroy the new tech. - Gutenberg's invention of the printing-press undermined the religious establishment's authority. Priests, often the only people literate in Latin, could open up an expensive parchment Latin Bible and tell the populace "The Holy Bible says blah blah blah...". Cheap English translations via Gutenberg's printing press allowed the populace to respond "No, it doesn't". The Church's initial reaction was to ban English Bible translations, and burn their authors at the stake (e.g. William Tyndale in 1536) - The automobile was fought tooth-and-nail by the horse-and-buggy industry. Ever heard of the "Red Flag Law"? - Low-cost (and for that matter no-cost) Open Source software is threatening to undermine Microsoft's monopoly. Microsoft's response is to amass software patents and spread FUD about Open Source software ( http://news.com.com/2100-7344-5457879.html ). And then there's the Darl McBride fiaSCO. Web-publishing threatens the grip of the old-line media. In the old days, you needed to be a multi-millionaire, if not a billionaire, to own the media necessary to promote your version of the truth. Today, anybody with a few dollars a month for an internet connection and a webpage has the chance to have their story seen by a worldwide audience. And the old-line media are fighting tooth-and-nail to discredit/outlaw/hobble the new media. I don't deny that there will be plenty of garbage in the new media, but then again, there's plenty of garbage in the old media. Walter Dnes; my email address is *ALMOST* like wzaltdnes@waltdnes.org Delete the "z" to get my real address. If that gets blocked, follow the instructions at the end of the 550 message. [TELECOM Digest Editor's Note: Thank you very much for your excellent rebuttal. Just as there is **much** -- maybe a large majority of the stuff on the net -- which is total trash and to be certain it is *very cheap* and easy to mass produce here; I do not feel, as you do not, that 'cheap and easy to produce' equals trash automatically. And at the same time, arduous, time-consuming, relatively expensive to produce work does not equal 'good'. Consider in the early 1980's as Usenet and the mailing lists were first getting started, and how the newspapers used to fight us tooth and nail. What we said here had not appeared in the New York Times or Mrs. Graham's publications, the Washington Post or NewsWeak, so therefore there was no currency to it. As the web began to get underway in 1994-95, the newspapers were ever so eager to report all the bad things they could about us. Remember Joe Abernathy, for example, and his perfectly snotty reports -- filled with all kinds of bald faced lies which appeared in the print media in the early 1990's? Yes, the newspapers all have web sites now; they have to be in the loop after all, but don't think for a minute they are friends. And remember the New York Times reporter who had the audacity to ask in print here in this Digest "if you" (meaning me and other web publishers) "ask for money from your readers, how do we" (meaning the print media guys) "know you are not just charlatans collecting money to line your pockets?" Can you imagine that? As though newspapers were all so pure and white as snow and honest. Most of them are good and honest people, but then, so are many or most web publishers. And recall the radio personality from National Public Radio who asked here if I had been given permission to 'beg for money on the net' and I asked him "who gave *you* permission to spend days on end doing fund raising for NPR?" Somehow they are good, the web publishers are supposed to be the bad guys. I don't believe it. And Walt, your reference to Mr. Gutenberg, and his printing press: To the gentleman who castigated *me* in a slight of hand way because due to a typo error I got an additional /t/ in Gutenberg's name, Walt, you were mostly correct; Gutenberg's original intention was to 'bring glory to God and Mother Church' by his new ability to compile all the scriptures in a form convenient and easy for the common person. The church had fallen into such disarray in the middle ages and many of its teachings had become so heretical, his new invention would bring an end to all that confusion and ignorance, which it did do, but ultimatly the joke was on Gutenberg wasn't it? Over a space of about a hundred years, by the late 1500's, there were printing presses all over Europe, around a million of them, printing all kinds of things. Gutenberg thought his invention would solidify the church's power and make corrections as needed in its teachings. We know now that was not the case at all. And today, the net serves as a good check on the crud which gets printed in the established media, doesn't it. PAT] ------------------------------ From: shlichter1@aol.com (Shlichter1) Date: 12 Dec 2004 18:51:18 GMT Organization: AOL http://www.aol.com Subject: Spammer with a toll free number and really big BALLS The following number and address were on a Spam that I received. I called his number and was really surprised, I got him and his comment was there was an optout, there was not, beside who in their right mind would give a spammer your e-mail to let him know it was good. The slim even called me back, he must have real time ANI. Let him know what you think about Spam, let your friends also know. Give your local pay phone operator a boost in money since with all these Cell Phones he is not making as much. The only good spammer is a dead one!! Have you hunted one down today? (c) I Kill Spammers, Inc. A Rot In Hell Company. Apple Elite II BBS will return. [TELECOM Digest Editor's Note: I did *not* edit this message and remove the phone number, etc. Steve did not give us any phone number, although I looked everywhere for it including my trash basket. PAT] ------------------------------ From: jmeissen@aracnet.com Subject: Telemarketing to Cell Phones Date: 12 Dec 2004 19:24:53 GMT Organization: http://extra.newsguy.com A thread in the local forsale newsgroup here has been debating the legality of making telemarketing calls to cell phones (in the US). While most people seem to believe it's NOT legal, no one has been able to provide a specific reference. Most people cite the TCPA, but it specifically refers to the use of automated dialing equipment. While most telemarketing sweatshops use autodialers, the question concerns local businesses who harvest phone numbers from, for instance, the state Department of Motor Vehicles and manually call the numbers on the list. Are these calls, in fact, legal? And if not, can someone cite a specific reference? John Meissen jmeissen@aracnet.com ------------------------------ Subject: Re: Western Electric and Al Capone Reply-To: jhaynes@alumni.uark.edu Organization: University of Arkansas Alumni From: haynes@alumni.uark.edu (Jim Haynes) Date: Sun, 12 Dec 2004 02:18:59 GMT In article ,Peter Brooks wrote: > Small correction: the folks portrayed in "The Eudaemonic Pie", Doyne > Farmer, Norm Packard, et. al. were not successful ultimately in > beating roulette for purely technological reasons (some devices didn't Yeah, I can see that I failed grossly to communicate what I meant to say. Where they were successful was in the concept that a roulette wheel is, at least some of the time, susceptible to statistical prediction. jhhaynes at earthlink dot net ------------------------------ From: Tony P. Subject: Re: Sprint, Nextel in Merger Talks Organization: ATCC Date: Sat, 11 Dec 2004 22:14:18 -0500 In article , pro_engineer_97 @yahoo.com says: > I have been employed by Sprint PCS in the past, and am currently > employed by Nextel. Nextel has excellent benefits, and has a great > working environment. They don't just "talk the talk", they truly care > about their employees. They will even give you $3,500 to assist with > adopting a child. > Sprint, on the other hand, has mediocre benefits at best, and treat > their employees as "just another number". > The news of this merger is a big disappointment to me, and I advise all > Nextel employees to get ready for the "shaft". > I reactivated my resume on all of the major job boards today. Sprint is > not a good place to work. What a shame. I can't stand the consolidation that is going on in the wireless market over the past few years. Nextel seems like it really is a progressive company. Too bad it's going to get suppressed by Sprint. Best of luck in your search for a new job. ------------------------------ From: DevilsPGD Subject: Re: FAX vs VOIP Date: Sat, 11 Dec 2004 20:17:38 -0700 Organization: Posted via Supernews, http://www.supernews.com In message dave@compata.com (Dave Close) wrote: >> My 3-year old FAX machine works fine on my Vonage service. > Sending or receiving? Vonage, for example, provides support for > incoming fax calls, especially if you notify them. But when I've tried > sending, my fax generally is unable to sync with the destination > machine. Using *99? I walked into a bar the other day and ordered a double. The bartender brought out a guy who looked just like me. ------------------------------ From: DevilsPGD Subject: Re: Radar Detectors Date: Sat, 11 Dec 2004 20:17:39 -0700 Organization: Posted via Supernews, http://www.supernews.com In message Tim@Backhome.org wrote: > [TELECOM Digest Editor's Note: When traveling south on Pennsylvania > Avenue (highway 75 here) the stop/go lights are timed in such a way > that if you make one light, and *travel at the right speed* you can > make all the lights all the way downtown. On the other hand, miss one > light, and you miss them all. PAT] What do you mean "miss them all"? -- If you miss one, you stop and wait, then they're all green again. You get up to speed and get through the rest on schedule, no? I walked into a bar the other day and ordered a double. The bartender brought out a guy who looked just like me. ------------------------------ Reply-To: Dave VanHorn From: Dave VanHorn Subject: Re: Urban Legends Reference Pages: Politics (Celling Your Soul) Date: Sat, 11 Dec 2004 22:36:01 -0500 One thing I've noticed lately, is a lot of telemarketing calls from Quebec. Note that Canadian telemarketers are not bound by US law. ------------------------------ From: Tony P. Subject: Re: What's VOip With Pictures Called? Organization: ATCC Date: Sat, 11 Dec 2004 22:22:50 -0500 In article , RickMerrill@comTHROWcast.net says: > My guess is that VoIP providers will move towards videophone as soon > as feasible. What do you think? - RM > [TELECOM Digest Editor's Note: If any sort of universal interchange > agreement (on handling each other's traffic) gets started, then > I agree this 'VOIP-CAM' application will be a winner. Bell never did > get too far along with videophone -- in terms of popular usage -- but > I think we live in a different era now. PAT] While it was technically feasible it wasn't economically feasible for Bell to pursue widespread videophone service. The bandwidth needed at the time would have required them to build a complete switching infrastructure just to handle the video. Not cheap and that is precisely why Bell abandoned video service at the time. Now of course there are all sorts of IP based videoconferencing solutions. We use the Polycomm units at our office to hook up to other agencies and it all goes out via IP. ------------------------------ From: DevilsPGD Subject: Re: Calling Card Needed -- Short Interaction Sequence Date: Sat, 11 Dec 2004 21:35:20 -0700 Organization: Posted via Supernews, http://www.supernews.com In message Danny Burstein wrote: >> Even OneSuite charges 55 cents from payphone. >> But for that 55 cents you can make multiple successive calls. > Then their billing arrangement is broken. The FCC regs are that the > pay phone operator gets their kickback of (usually about $0.30 [a]) > for _each_ call. If you (typically) hit the " * " button on the keypad > to tell your phonecard service to let you make a second call without > having to hangup and redial the whole kit and kaboodle, the FCC regs > treat that one as, yes, a second call, with an additional $0.30. Interesting, do you know what defines when a second call starts? Peter: I read a book about this sort of thing once. Brian: Are you sure it was a book? Are you sure it wasn't nothing? Peter: Oh yeah. ------------------------------ From: Clark W. Griswold, Jr. Subject: Re: Calling Card Needed -- Short Interaction Sequence Date: Sat, 11 Dec 2004 18:28:46 -0700 Organization: Posted via Supernews, http://www.supernews.com NOTvalid@surplus4actors.INFO wrote: > Even OneSuite charges 55 cents from payphone. > But for that 55 cents you can make multiple successive calls. Not legally, unless One Suite is eating the cost of subsequent calls. Several years ago the rules were changed. Any carrier that allows multiple calls without hanging up is supposed to remit a fee to the phone owner for each call, even if the call was initiated as a follow on call without hanging up. ------------------------------ Date: 12 Dec 2004 01:37:47 -0000 From: John Levine Subject: Re: Cellphones Aloft: The Inevitable is Closer Organization: I.E.C.C., Trumansburg NY USA >> The picocell linked to several antennas inside a cable that gathered >> signals from passengers' cellphones and sent them all to a small >> satellite dish, ... > Hey! Maybe they could do the same thing in buildings as well, and we > wouldn't have to worry about running over the thousands of people > wandering around in parking lots talking on their cellphones because > they can't get a signal inside the building :-). Mobile carriers put tiny cells all over the place if there's likely to be significant usage. You find them, for example, in the tunnels under Boston harbor so people can continue talking on their cell phones while they drive as fast as possible to the airport. (Boston traffic is already so chaotic that the extra safety hazard is negligible.) If there's a lot of people in building and crummy cell coverage, it might be fun to call a cell carrier or two and see if they're willing to put in a picocell. I would imagine that some buildings with steel insides might be impractical to cover since the frames act like a Faraday cage and kill any signals. John R. Levine, IECC, POB 727, Trumansburg NY 14886 +1 607 330 5711 johnl@iecc.com, Mayor, http://johnlevine.com, Member, Provisional board, Coalition Against Unsolicited Commercial E-mail ------------------------------ From: David Clayton Subject: Re: Radar Detectors Date: Sun, 12 Dec 2004 13:06:31 +1100 Tim@Backhome.org contributed the following: > hancock4@bbs.cpcn.com wrote: >> I wish the cops didn't need cameras and speed traps, but motorists >> have only themselves to blame. > An automatic speed timing/enforcement device that permits up to 39 in > a 25 mph zone is hardly a speed trap. That is a generous buffer. I > am presuming the 25 mph limit is justified, which it usually is in a > residential setting. > [TELECOM Digest Editor's Note: When traveling south on Pennsylvania > Avenue (highway 75 here) the stop/go lights are timed in such a way > that if you make one light, and *travel at the right speed* you can > make all the lights all the way downtown. On the other hand, miss one > light, and you miss them all. PAT] A few years ago on a major road in my city, a system was trialled where computerised signs would advise drivers what speed to travel at to get the "green wave" of traffic lights. Unfortunately too many people were stuck in their idiotic habit of travelling to the next red light as quickly as they could, so when the people who did heed the signs arrived at an intersection a little bit later, they were confronted with traffic slowly moving from a red light rather than already moving vehicles. Regards, David Clayton, e-mail: dcstar@XYZ.myrealbox.com Melbourne, Victoria, Australia. (Remove the "XYZ." to reply) Dilbert's words of wisdom #18: Never argue with an idiot. They drag you down to their level then beat you with experience. ------------------------------ From: Pete Romfh Subject: Re: Vonage Voice Quality Getting Worse? Date: Sun, 12 Dec 2004 09:39:44 -0600 Organization: Not Organized John R Levine wrote: > I've had Vonage phone service for nearly two years, > running over the T1 in my office. For the most part > voice quality has been pretty good. Recently I've found > it's often just plain lousy, distortions and dropouts bad > enough that I switch to my cell phone which sounds better. > It seems to be worse in the evening (eastern time). I > looked at some local link statistics and the local > connection doesn't seem to be particularly congested, and > traceroutes show a path from my ISP through Sprint to the > peering point where Vonage connects, with no big delays, > Have other people had voice quality problems with Vonage? > Regards, > John Levine johnl@iecc.com Primary Perpetrator of The > Internet for Dummies, Information Superhighwayman wanna- > be, http://iecc.com/johnl, Mayor "I dropped the > toothpaste", said Tom, crestfallenly. I haven't noticed any major change here in Houston. Cisco-186A behind Buffalo router over 1.2Mbps DSL. Pete Romfh, Telecom Geek & Amateur Gourmet. promfh at hal dash pc dot org ------------------------------ From: LSmithsonvqm@hotmail.com Subject: Re: EarthLink High Speed Internet Service Ranked Highest Date: 12 Dec 2004 08:32:23 -0800 Organization: http://groups.google.com Monty Solomon wrote: > EarthLink Garners Top Honors for Second Consecutive Year > ATLANTA, Aug. 5 /PRNewswire-FirstCall/ -- EarthLink (Nasdaq: ELNK), > one of the nation's leading Internet service providers, today > announced that its high-speed Internet service has been recognized by > J.D. Power and Associates in its 2003 Internet Service Provider > Residential Customer Satisfaction Study(SM) with the highest ranking > in customer satisfaction for the second year in a row. > - http://finance.lycos.com/home/news/story.asp?story=35139843 I see. That is why I got a call this morning with AOL and Time Warner babbling about how great the service they provide using Earthlink lines is. I told the leaches that I would deal with Earthlink directly. ------------------------------ From: Danny Burstein Subject: Re: Kevin Mitnick Recalled Date: Sun, 12 Dec 2004 00:57:23 UTC Organization: PANIX Public Access Internet and UNIX, NYC In Lisa Minter writes: > Rummaging around through the Telecom Archives, I found two interesting > items on Kevin Mitnick. I wonder if anyone knows what he has been > doing since 1997 or whenever he got out of prison. From a recent post I made to another group: Subject: Mitnick using his powers for Good. Demonstrates Windows probs "Surfing the Web has never been more risky. "Simply connecting to the Internet -- and doing nothing else -- exposes your PC to non-stop, automated break-in attempts by intruders looking to take control of your machine surreptitiously. "While most break-in tries fail, an unprotected PC can get hijacked within minutes of accessing the Internet. ... "'It's a hostile environment out there,' says tech security consultant Kevin Mitnick, who served five years in prison for breaking into corporate computer systems in the mid-1990s. "Attackers have become extremely indiscriminate." [ snippety snip ] http://www.usatoday.com/tech/news/computersecurity/hacking/2004-11-29-honeypot_x.htm _____________________________________________________ Knowledge may be power, but communications is the key dannyb@panix.com [to foil spammers, my address has been double rot-13 encoded] ------------------------------ Date: 12 Dec 2004 01:18:20 -0000 From: John Levine Subject: Re: Kevin Mitnick Recalled Organization: I.E.C.C., Trumansburg NY USA In article you write: > Rummaging around through the Telecom Archives, I found two interesting > items on Kevin Mitnick. I wonder if anyone knows what he has been > doing since 1997 or whenever he got out of prison. He wrote a fairly bad book about social engineering in 2002. See the Wikipedia article about him at http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Kevin_Mitnick ------------------------------ TELECOM Digest is an electronic journal devoted mostly but not exclusively to telecommunications topics. It is circulated anywhere there is email, in addition to various telecom forums on a variety of networks such as Compuserve and America On Line, Yahoo Groups, and other forums. It is also gatewayed to Usenet where it appears as the moderated newsgroup 'comp.dcom.telecom'. TELECOM Digest is a not-for-profit, mostly non-commercial educational service offered to the Internet by Patrick Townson. All the contents of the Digest are compilation-copyrighted. You may reprint articles in some other media on an occasional basis, but please attribute my work and that of the original author. Contact information: Patrick Townson/TELECOM Digest Post Office Box 50 Independence, KS 67301 Phone: 620-402-0134 Fax 1: 775-255-9970 Fax 2: 530-309-7234 Fax 3: 208-692-5145 Email: editor@telecom-digest.org Subscribe: telecom-subscribe@telecom-digest.org Unsubscribe:telecom-unsubscribe@telecom-digest.org This Digest is the oldest continuing e-journal about telecomm- unications on the Internet, having been founded in August, 1981 and published continuously since then. Our archives are available for your review/research. We believe we are the oldest e-zine/mailing list on the internet in any category! URL information: http://telecom-digest.org Anonymous FTP: mirror.lcs.mit.edu/telecom-archives/archives/ (or use our mirror site: ftp.epix.net/pub/telecom-archives) Email <==> FTP: telecom-archives@telecom-digest.org Send a simple, one line note to that automated address for a help file on how to use the automatic retrieval system for archives files. You can get desired files in email. ************************************************************************* * TELECOM Digest is partially funded by a grant from * * Judith Oppenheimer, President of ICB Inc. and purveyor of accurate * * 800 & Dot Com News, Intelligence, Analysis, and Consulting. * * http://ICBTollFree.com, http://1800TheExpert.com * * Views expressed herein should not be construed as representing * * views of Judith Oppenheimer or ICB Inc. * ************************************************************************* ICB Toll Free News. Contact information is not sold, rented or leased. One click a day feeds a person a meal. Go to http://www.thehungersite.com Copyright 2004 ICB, Inc. and TELECOM Digest. All rights reserved. Our attorney is Bill Levant, of Blue Bell, PA. ************************ DIRECTORY ASSISTANCE JUST 65 CENTS ONE OR TWO INQUIRIES CHARGED TO YOUR CREDIT CARD! REAL TIME, UP TO DATE! SPONSORED BY TELECOM DIGEST AND EASY411.COM SIGN UP AT http://www.easy411.com/telecomdigest ! ************************ --------------------------------------------------------------- Finally, the Digest is funded by gifts from generous readers such as yourself who provide funding in amounts deemed appropriate. Your help is important and appreciated. A suggested donation of fifty dollars per year per reader is considered appropriate. See our address above. Please make at least a single donation to cover the cost of processing your name to the mailing list. All opinions expressed herein are deemed to be those of the author. Any organizations listed are for identification purposes only and messages should not be considered any official expression by the organization. End of TELECOM Digest V23 #594 ****************************** From editor@telecom-digest.org Mon Dec 13 13:01:05 2004 Received: (from ptownson@localhost) by massis.lcs.mit.edu (8.11.6p3/8.11.6) id iBDI15R16967; Mon, 13 Dec 2004 13:01:05 -0500 (EST) Date: Mon, 13 Dec 2004 13:01:05 -0500 (EST) From: editor@telecom-digest.org Message-Id: <200412131801.iBDI15R16967@massis.lcs.mit.edu> X-Authentication-Warning: massis.lcs.mit.edu: ptownson set sender to editor@telecom-digest.org using -f To: ptownson Approved: patsnewlist Subject: TELECOM Digest V23 #595 TELECOM Digest Mon, 13 Dec 2004 13:01:00 EST Volume 23 : Issue 595 Inside This Issue: Editor: Patrick A. Townson Telecom Update (Canada) #461, December 13, 2004 (Angus TeleManagement) Channelized T1 (tele-commuter) Dialogic JCT Series (Maverick) Strange Wireless Problem (Matt B.) Is 'Transitional Fair Use' The Wave Of The Future? (Monty Solomon) Re: Unlimited Calling Plan to India (vijay.vishy@gmail.com) Re: Kevin Mitnick Recalled (Al Dykes) Re: Urban Legends Reference Pages: (Celling Your Soul) (Tony P.) Re: Vonage Voice Quality Getting Worse? (Mark Roberts) Re: Calling Card Needed -- Short Interaction Sequence (Joseph) Re: Entrenched Interests Versus Disruptive Technology (Tony P.) Re: Question About ROLM PBX Telephones (CWB) Re: Telemarketing to Cell Phones (Lisa Hancock) Re: EarthLink High Speed Internet Service Ranked Highest (news01@jmatt) Re: Dropping SBC For a VoIP Solution - Vonage or Packet8 (Ringo Langly) Re: Radar Detectors (Geoffrey Welsh) A New Page of VoIP News (Jack Decker) Telecom and VOIP (Voice over Internet Protocol) Digest for the Internet. All contents here are copyrighted by Patrick Townson and the individual writers/correspondents. Articles may be used in other journals or newsgroups, provided the writer's name and the Digest are included in the fair use quote. By using -any name or email address- included herein for -any- reason other than responding to an article herein, you agree to pay a hundred dollars to the recipients of the email. =========================== Addresses herein are not to be added to any mailing list, nor to be sold or given away without explicit written consent. Chain letters, viruses, porn, spam, and miscellaneous junk are definitely unwelcome. We must fight spam for the same reason we fight crime: not because we are naive enough to believe that we will ever stamp it out, but because we do not want the kind of world that results when no one stands against crime. Geoffrey Welsh =========================== See the bottom of this issue for subscription and archive details and the name of our lawyer; other stuff of interest. ---------------------------------------------------------------------- Date: Mon, 13 Dec 2004 09:57:11 -0500 From: Angus TeleManagement Subject: Telecom Update (Canada) #461, December 13, 2004 ************************************************************ TELECOM UPDATE ************************************************************ published weekly by Angus TeleManagement Group http://www.angustel.ca Number 461: December 13, 2004 Publication of Telecom Update is made possible by generous financial support from: ** ALLSTREAM: www.allstream.com ** AVAYA: www.avaya.ca/en/ ** BELL CANADA: www.bell.ca ** CISCO SYSTEMS CANADA: www.cisco.com/ca/ ** ERICSSON: www.ericsson.ca ** MITEL NETWORKS: www.mitel.com/ ** SPRINT CANADA: www.sprint.ca ** UTC CANADA: www.canada.utc.org/ ************************************************************ IN THIS ISSUE: ** Rogers Plans July Phone Launch ** Do-Not-Call Law Expected ** Bell Canada to Acquire Integrator ** Some Nortel Results This Week? ** EastLink to Sell Rogers Cellphones ** Mixed Views Filed on Bell's Tariff Proposal ** FCM, Calgary, and Vancouver Lose Intervention Bid ** SaskTel DSL Now Provided to CLEC Customers ** Allstream Expands Link with BT ** Remote Working Increases in Canada ** Task Force Lists "Best Practices" to Stop Spam ** Yahoo Hi-Speed Comes to Newfoundland ** Telus Named Top Cellco in North America ** Aliant Buys Fujitsu Consulting Units ** Telus Invests in Internet Software Developer ** Nortel Gets Billion-Dollar Order From Sprint ** Look, UBS Plan Mobile Video ** Peeters Named Chair of Cogeco ** Opening Up Wi-Fi to Guests and Customers ============================================================ ROGERS PLANS JULY PHONE LAUNCH: Speaking last week at a Credit Suisse First Boston conference, Rogers Communications CEO Ted Rogers said his company will begin testing IP-based local telephone service in April 2005 and launch it commercially on July 1. He described the planned offering as "a primary-line service with complete back-up power and number portability," and said they hope to bundle it with wireless service by 2006. DO-NOT-CALL LAW EXPECTED: Published reports say that this week the federal government will table legislation to create a national do-not-call registry. The Canadian Marketing Association favours such a registry, but some telemarketing companies are strongly opposed. BELL CANADA TO ACQUIRE INTEGRATOR: Bell Canada is offering $67 million for all outstanding shares of Nexxlink Technologies, a Quebec IT integration firm. Nexxlink's board and holders of 41% of the shares have endorsed the bid. Nexxlink netted $776,000 on $34 million in sales in the three months ended October 31. SOME NORTEL RESULTS THIS WEEK? Nortel Networks, which has missed several previous deadlines for reporting financial results, now says that this week it will publish "estimated unaudited results for the first and second quarters of 2004 and limited estimated unaudited results for 2001, 2002, 2003, and the third quarter of 2004." ** It expects to begin filing "audited financial statements for the year 2003 and unaudited financial statements for the first and second quarters of 2004, and related periodic reports" on January 10. EASTLINK TO SELL ROGERS CELLPHONES: EastLink, the cable TV company that offers local telephone service in several cities in Nova Scotia and PEI, has begun bundling Rogers Wireless services with its other offerings. EastLink bundle customers who add a Rogers Wireless Mega Time or Family Plan to their account will receive a 15% discount on their airtime charges. MIXED VIEWS FILED ON BELL TARIFF PROPOSAL: Aliant, SaskTel, the Coalition for Competitive Telecommunications, and the Public Interest Advocacy Centre have filed comments supporting Bell Canada's proposal to speed tariff approvals (see Telecom Update #457). Telus has proposed an alternative plan. Most competitors oppose the proposal; Sprint and MTS- Allstream filed particularly detailed critiques. www.crtc.gc.ca/PartVII/eng/2004/8657/b2_200412627.htm 2005 CONTRIBUTION LEVEL SET: CRTC Telecom Decision 2004-81 finalizes the 2004 contribution fee paid by all telecommunications service providers at 1.1%, and sets the 2005 fee at the same percentage on an interim basis. www.crtc.gc.ca/archive/ENG/Decisions/2004/dt2004-81.htm FCM, CALGARY, AND VANCOUVER LOSE INTERVENTION BID: CRTC Telecom Decision 2004-79 denies applications by Edmonton, Vancouver, and the Federation of Canadian Municipalities to be allowed to participate in the applications by MTS Allstream to have its contracts with Toronto and Calgary revised by the commission. ** Allstream is to file renewed submissions by early January. www.crtc.gc.ca/archive/ENG/Decisions/2004/dt2004-79.htm SASKTEL DSL NOW PROVIDED TO CLEC CUSTOMERS: Complying with a CRTC order in May (see Telecom Update #434), SaskTel now permits customers who obtain their local phone service from a CLEC using a SaskTel unbundled loop to obtain or keep the telco's retail DSL Internet service. ** The CRTC did not order SaskTel to provide DSL over "dry copper," saying this question will be addressed in the Maskatel/FCI Broadband application filed in March (see Telecom Update #427). www.crtc.gc.ca/archive/ENG/Orders/2004/o2004-413.htm ALLSTREAM EXPANDS LINK WITH BT: Allstream says it has now expanded the reach of its MPLS network globally through BT's network. Allstream is BT's preferred supplier of data services in Canada. REMOTE WORKING INCREASES IN CANADA: In a survey sponsored by AT&T, two-thirds of Canadian executives interviewed said that at least some of their staff work from home regularly, a substantial increase from a year earlier. Eighty percent said remote working is a key focus when setting technology strategies, and 74% said at least half of their employees have broadband access at home. www.business.att.com/emea/english/whitepaper/ TASK FORCE LISTS "BEST PRACTICES" TO STOP SPAM: The federal Task Force on Spam (see Telecom Update #433) has identified nine "best practices" that ISPs should adopt to reduce spam, including blocking e-mail file attachments with specific extensions known to carry infections, and filtering e-mail file attachments based on content properties. The Task Force will submit its final report in the spring. http://e-com.ic.gc.ca/epic/internet/inecic-ceac.nsf/en/gv00267e.html YAHOO HI-SPEED COMES TO NEWFOUNDLAND: Rogers Cable has begun converting its Internet customers in parts of Newfoundland to the Rogers Yahoo Hi-Speed Internet service it launched earlier this year in Ontario and New Brunswick. The company says customers will not have to change their e-mail addresses and can register online in about two minutes. TELUS NAMED TOP CELLCO IN NORTH AMERICA: N. Moore Capital, a U.S. financial analysis company, has named Telus Mobility the top performing wireless carrier in North America, based on average revenue per subscriber, churn, free cash flow per subscriber, and cost of acquisition. ALIANT BUYS FUJITSU CONSULTING UNITS: Xwave, a subsidiary of Aliant, has acquired the operations of Fujitsu Consulting Inc. in Halifax, Saint John, and Fredericton, including 90 employees and existing projects. Fujitsu's Consulting Business Services and Atlantic Delivery Center are not included in the deal. TELUS INVESTS IN INTERNET SOFTWARE DEVELOPER: Telus Ventures has become a shareholder in Vision Critical Communications, a Vancouver software company specializing in Internet and new media applications for the market research and polling industry. The amount of Telus's investment was not released. NORTEL GETS BILLION-DOLLAR ORDER FROM SPRINT: Nortel Networks says that Sprint U.S. has agreed to buy wireless network equipment and services worth about US$1 billion over the next three years. LOOK, UBS PLAN MOBILE VIDEO: Look Communications and Unique Broadband Systems say they will jointly launch mobile video services in Toronto and Montreal early in 2006. The service will broadcast 80 video channels and 100 digital audio channels to handheld PDA-sized devices. PEETERS NAMED CHAIR OF COGECO: Jan Peeters, who headed early long-distance competitor Fonorola until it was acquired by Call-Net in 1998, has been named Chairman of the Board of Cogeco Cable. OPENING UP WI-FI TO GUESTS AND CUSTOMERS: The current issue of Telemanagement analyzes initiatives by Canadian organizations to make their Wi-Fi networks available to non- employees with no loss of security. Also in this issue: ** Reinventing Telecom Management--Again ** Avaya and Mitel: Two Strategies for IP Success ** IP Shakes Up Health Care Network These reports are available to Telemanagement subscribers only. To subscribe today, call 1-800-263-4415 ext 500 or go to www.angustel.ca/teleman/tm-sub-online.html. ============================================================ HOW TO SUBMIT ITEMS FOR TELECOM UPDATE E-MAIL: editors@angustel.ca FAX: 905-686-2655 MAIL: TELECOM UPDATE Angus TeleManagement Group 8 Old Kingston Road Ajax, Ontario Canada L1T 2Z7 =========================================================== HOW TO SUBSCRIBE (OR UNSUBSCRIBE) TELECOM UPDATE is provided in electronic form only. There are two formats available: 1. The fully-formatted edition is posted on the World Wide Web on the first business day of the week at www.angustel.ca 2. The e-mail edition is distributed free of charge. To subscribe, send an e-mail message to: join-telecom_update@nova.sparklist.com To stop receiving the e-mail edition, send an e-mail message to: leave-telecom_update@nova.sparklist.com Sending e-mail to these addresses will automatically add or remove the sender's e-mail address from the list. Leave subject line and message area blank. We do not give Telecom Update subscribers' e-mail addresses to any third party. For more information, see www.angustel.ca/update/privacy.html. =========================================================== COPYRIGHT AND CONDITIONS OF USE: All contents copyright 2004 Angus TeleManagement Group Inc. All rights reserved. For further information, including permission to reprint or reproduce, please e-mail rosita@angustel.ca or phone 905-686-5050 ext 500. The information and data included has been obtained from sources which we believe to be reliable, but Angus TeleManagement makes no warranties or representations whatsoever regarding accuracy, completeness, or adequacy. Opinions expressed are based on interpretation of available information, and are subject to change. If expert advice on the subject matter is required, the services of a competent professional should be obtained. ------------------------------ From: tele-commuter Subject: Channelized T1 Date: 13 Dec 2004 02:07:06 -0800 Organization: http://groups.google.com Hi folks, Despite my sincere efforts,I am not able to understand the exact difference between : 1. A Channelized and an Unchannelized communication(T1/E1) link? 2. Is Channelized/Unchannelized the same as Multiplexed/ Non-Multiplexed ? I will be grateful to anyone who can provide me with some insight into this. TIA, tele-commuter ------------------------------ From: Maverick Subject: Dialogic JCT Series Date: 13 Dec 2004 04:26:24 -0800 Organization: http://groups.google.com Hi, I am interested in knowing the capabilities of Dialogic JCT series boards. Can any one please tell me if the JCT boards specially the low density boards ( for instance VFX/41JCT or D/41JCT-LS ) will provide the following: - PABX integration ( which PABXs can be integrated ) - support of VoIP/GSM ( the data sheet tells us that such boards support GSM and 7.26, but how do I access it..??? ) Any help in this regard is appreciated. Thanks in Advance. Maverick ------------------------------ From: Matt B. Subject: Strange Wireless Problem Date: Mon, 13 Dec 2004 07:29:11 -0500 Hello all, I'm having a strange problem and I hope you can help ... A few co-workers are using wireless-enabled laptops. They are able to receive e-mail from the POP3 server, but are unable to send. They get the error "The server has timed out ... might be server problems, etc.." If they plug in to a wired connection, it works fine. Everyone is using Outlook 2000 or 2003. It doesn't matter where they are using the wireless connection -- at home, at the office, at great-grandma Edna's ... it all does the same thing ... and we are at a loss! Any suggestions would be greatly appreciated! Thanks, Matt B. e-mail: moc.oohay@02091bttam <--Blocked...reverse it ------------------------------ Date: Sun, 12 Dec 2004 23:11:09 -0500 From: Monty Solomon Subject: Is 'Transitional Fair Use' The Wave Of The Future? Is 'Transitional Fair Use' The Wave Of The Future? Written By Rick Ellis, Monday, November 28th, 2004 When HBO's "Six Feet Under" returns in 2005, it won't just be the end of a long-running hit series. It may also be a turning point for TV viewers who are in the habit of recording shows to watch weeks or even months later. Sources at two different cable companies have told AllYourTV.com that discussions have begun which will may lead to a restriction of use for fans of several popular television shows. The discussions are reportedly in very early stages, and the details are still very broad. But this is what I can confirm at this date. A middle-level executive at Time Warner has approached several cable companies and broached the idea of restricting the ability of customers who use those company's Digital Video Recorders to record several popular Time Warner TV programs. The term being used by the executive is "transitional fair use," and the scenerio laid out goes roughly along these lines: Viewers would be able to record an episode with their DVR, but there would be a time limit on how long it would be available for viewing. The executive was pushing for an expiration date that coincided with the premiere of the next episode. The consensus of the cable executived was that it needed to be between 2-4 weeks. ... http://www.allyourtv.com/0405season/news/november/11282004transitional.html ------------------------------ From: vijay.vishy@gmail.com Subject: Re: Unlimited Calling Plan to India Date: 12 Dec 2004 15:45:27 -0800 Organization: http://groups.google.com Thanks for your suggestions. I knew about the first option [SIP phones isn't it?] I will be calling all over India not just one number. I am using @10cpm but a reliable service. I am surprised to learn that there is not even one company that is providing unlimited international calling plan. [TELECOM Digest Editor's Note: *Assuming* (big assmuption, I know) that local calls within India are reasonably priced and you can get them (in bulk or otherwise) for less than 10cpm, why not consider part of the other suggestion which was made: Install a computer and a Vonage or other TA at a *trusted source* in India along with a call-extender. Have the call-extender pick up the Vonage line when it rings and extend new dial tone (from India) to you in the USA and make the equivilent of a 'local call' from your source in India to wherever. Again, assuming the cost of the local call (within India) plus the VOIP charge, plus the computer for the other end, etc. eventually will work out to less than 10cpm. PAT] ------------------------------ From: adykes@panix.com (Al Dykes) Subject: Re: Kevin Mitnick Recalled Date: 12 Dec 2004 17:43:32 -0500 Organization: PANIX -- Public Access Networks Corp. In article , Danny Burstein wrote: > In Lisa Minter > writes: >> Rummaging around through the Telecom Archives, I found two interesting >> items on Kevin Mitnick. I wonder if anyone knows what he has been >> doing since 1997 or whenever he got out of prison. > From a recent post I made to another group: >Subject: Mitnick using his powers for Good. Demonstrates Windows probs > "Surfing the Web has never been more risky. > "Simply connecting to the Internet -- and doing nothing else -- > exposes your PC to non-stop, automated break-in attempts by intruders > looking to take control of your machine surreptitiously. > "While most break-in tries fail, an unprotected PC can get hijacked > within minutes of accessing the Internet. > "'It's a hostile environment out there,' says tech security consultant > Kevin Mitnick, who served five years in prison for breaking into > corporate computer systems in the mid-1990s. "Attackers have become > extremely indiscriminate." > [ snippety snip ] > http://www.usatoday.com/tech/news/computersecurity/hacking/2004-11-29-honeypot_x.htm > dannyb@panix.com I found Mitnick's book _The Art of Deception: Controlling the Human Element of Security_ a good presentation on Social Engineering, useful to give clueless technical people an idea as to just how sneaky a con artist can be and how difficult it can be to make a large organization a hard target. a d y k e s @ p a n i x . c o m ------------------------------ From: Tony P. Subject: Re: Urban Legends Reference Pages: Politics (Celling Your Soul) Organization: ATCC Date: Sun, 12 Dec 2004 21:04:23 -0500 In article , dvanhorn@dvanhorn.org says: > One thing I've noticed lately, is a lot of telemarketing calls from > Quebec. Note that Canadian telemarketers are not bound by US law. I've noted the same thing. Is there some particular reason this occurs? ------------------------------ From: markrobt@myrealbox.com (Mark Roberts) Subject: Re: Vonage Voice Quality Getting Worse? Date: Mon, 13 Dec 2004 02:24:47 -0000 Organization: 1.94 meters John R Levine had written: > Have other people had voice quality problems with Vonage? Usually, no. When it does happen, it seems to happen with calls to certain rural areas (one in Missouri, in particular). A second try at placing the calls usually clears them up. ATA-186 behind a Linksys router with QoS enabled. Mark Roberts | "Kansas City, named after Kansas, most of it's in Oakland, Cal.| Missouri. That's not right!" NO HTML MAIL | -- Jon Stewart (The Daily Show, November 17, 2004) ------------------------------ From: Joseph Subject: Re: Calling Card Needed -- Short Interaction Sequence Date: Sun, 12 Dec 2004 16:20:43 -0800 Reply-To: JoeOfSeattle@yahoo.com On Sat, 11 Dec 2004 21:35:20 -0700, DevilsPGD wrote: >> Then their billing arrangement is broken. The FCC regs are that the >> pay phone operator gets their kickback of (usually about $0.30 [a]) >> for _each_ call. If you (typically) hit the " * " button on the keypad >> to tell your phonecard service to let you make a second call without >> having to hangup and redial the whole kit and kaboodle, the FCC regs >> treat that one as, yes, a second call, with an additional $0.30. > Interesting, do you know what defines when a second call starts? Why is this such a difficult question? You finish one call and begin another one. When the second call answers the second call starts. ------------------------------ From: Tony P. Subject: Re: Entrenched Interests Versus Disruptive Technology Organization: ATCC Date: Sun, 12 Dec 2004 21:07:45 -0500 In article , wzaltdnes@waltdnes.org says: > On Thu, 9 Dec 2004 23:38:11 -0500, Ron Chapman, > wrote: >> Books, by their very nature, are wrought from processes that distill >> the crap out and leave hard-considered facts and opinions. But on the >> net, all it takes is one crazy to set up a "the Holocaust was a fake" >> blog -- and how does a ten year old know how to interpret that? He >> doesn't. But he reads it on the net ... so does he just go ahead and >> use that as "fact" to back up his assignment? >> It's all about EDITING. >> Now, maybe if my kid's research was done online using only EDITED >> resources, resources that have been through the same excruciating >> processes that produce printed books, that would be fine. > 100% taurine excrement. "The Protocols of the Elders of Zion" is a > published book that's been around for a century. "Mein Kampf" is > another book that was published long before the internet came into > existance. Would you accept them as authoritative if some kid used > them as sources for his homework assignment??? >> Unedited information makes for dangerous waters. It requires at the >> least parental coaching to help the child become a well-rounded and >> educated netizen. One should NOT leave the child alone to use the >> naked net to finish an assignment. My parents could leave me in the >> library by myself to do that, and I could leave my kid in the library >> today, but not on the net. Not alone and without guidance. > When someone once complained that 90% of science fiction was crud, > Theodore Sturgeon shot back that 90% of *EVERYTHING* was crud. This > is popularly known as "Sturgeon's Law". He was generally right, > although some people might argue that 90% is a conservative number. > Children need to be taught critical thinking and to critically examine > *ALL* "facts", regardless of where those alleged facts are found, > regardless of whether it's on the web or in a "respected publication". > Now to get onto the topic of my subject ... when a new technology > comes out that undermines entrenched interests using old tech, the old > entrenched interests will fight tooth-and-nail to destroy the new > tech. > - Gutenberg's invention of the printing-press undermined the > religious establishment's authority. Priests, often the only > people literate in Latin, could open up an expensive parchment > Latin Bible and tell the populace "The Holy Bible says blah blah > blah...". Cheap English translations via Gutenberg's printing > press allowed the populace to respond "No, it doesn't". The > Church's initial reaction was to ban English Bible translations, > and burn their authors at the stake (e.g. William Tyndale in 1536) > - The automobile was fought tooth-and-nail by the horse-and-buggy > industry. Ever heard of the "Red Flag Law"? > - Low-cost (and for that matter no-cost) Open Source software is > threatening to undermine Microsoft's monopoly. Microsoft's > response is to amass software patents and spread FUD about Open > Source software ( http://news.com.com/2100-7344-5457879.html ). > And then there's the Darl McBride fiaSCO. > Web-publishing threatens the grip of the old-line media. In the old > days, you needed to be a multi-millionaire, if not a billionaire, to > own the media necessary to promote your version of the truth. Today, > anybody with a few dollars a month for an internet connection and a > webpage has the chance to have their story seen by a worldwide > audience. And the old-line media are fighting tooth-and-nail to > discredit/outlaw/hobble the new media. I don't deny that there will > be plenty of garbage in the new media, but then again, there's plenty > of garbage in the old media. Speaking of threatening old line media I found this on Slashdot today: [TELECOM Digest Editor's Note: Notice also some of the ways what you refer to as 'old line' media (i.e. paper and printing presses and often as not a publisher with a few million dollars) have had to adapt in the past several years: One, delivery methods have changed a lot. There are no longer *any* afternoon newspapers in many cities. Both Chicago Daily News and the Chicago Herald-American went out of business totally as did Chicago Today. They say the afternoon traffic during the rush hour simply made it impractical to publish and distribute afternoon papers. Two, papers which were paid for with the cost of advertising and given away or 'sold' for the paltry sum of two cents or five cents now are sold for fifty cents or in the case of the Sunday paper maybe two or three dollars. Three, many of the formerly 'local' papers have gone 'national' in scope, using satellite publishing plants. For example, 'Wall Street Journal' published by Dow-Jones has a publisher in New York, in San Fransisco and in Chicago (where Chicago Tribune prints it locally.) Christian Science Monitor has publishing plants all over the USA also; in Chicago it is printed by one of the local daily newspapers. New York Times does the same thing; I think in Chicago it is published by the Tribune people. So no more two or three day delays in getting out of town newspapers. Now they arrive, usually by postal mail, the same day as is shown on the cover. The newspapers are adapting, trying hard to keep up with the internet. PAT] ------------------------------ From: CWB Subject: Re: Question About ROLM PBX Telephones Date: Mon, 13 Dec 2004 08:38:01 GMT Organization: Road Runner High Speed Online http://www.rr.com ROLM was a stand alone company and originally made Mil Spec flight computers ... the CBX (7000 and later the 8000 line) came from the computer side of the company. IBM did not buy into ROLM until the early-mid 80s ... by then, ROLM had climbed to the #2 PBX maker in North America (ahead of ATT but behind Nortel). IBM was responsible for the 9751 CBX (which was a overhauled designed of the VLCBXII 9000; my former company had SN #2 of the VLs in the 80s. The software was similar but the hardware was different). The color was changed as the original ROLM switches had Orange doors. The newer ROLM cabinets were white with the IBM blue logo seen in some areas ...(the BLUEING of RED ROLM it was called). Siemens bought into ROLM in the 90s ... and in 94, IBM sold ROLM entirely to Siemens...Siemens then changed the name of their HCM200 to the ROLM 9200 CBX (it was NOT ANYWHERE NEAR THE REAL ROLMS!) and then introduced the "new" Models30 and 80 of the 9751 series calling them the 9006i line (i standing for the Intel processor the Siemens boxes used vs the Motorola CPU the original 9751, now called the 9005/6m used). But the "new" models were totally different from the legacy 9751s (actually they were Siemens HCM300 PBXs renamed) and users did not like the new switch ... it still does not perform like an older ROLM CBX (which was the best on the market at the height of its time ... too bad it did not implement ISDN properly. ) The name ROLM is pretty much gone now ... Siemens dropped the ROLM name from its web site and most of the equipment ... the only thing Siemens kept from ROLM was PhoneMail ... but that has been outlived by its new offering, Xpressions 470 ... which is a multimedia offering; but keeping the same voice and operating codes, etc ...(the only thing Siemens did RIGHT with the ROLM line). The 9751-9005/6m is out of production but still being supported ... 9005.6.84 was the last software release for it. There are thousands of 8000CBXs still in service ... (but they are slowing being replaced). The 9751-9006i was renamed back to the HCM300 and has gotten better but still doesn't have certain features that the legacy 9751 did ! Siemens really did in ROLM and now trails Avaya and other PBX makers in installed systems in the US ...(down to #10 IIRC). Chris (former ROLM tech) wrote in message ews:telecom23.590.15@telecom-digest.org: > ROLM was originally an IBM CBX / PBX voice switching venture that was > in North America's arrival was purchased away from the German company > SEIMENS. IBM made many advancements and improvements to the systems > proprietary operating system and architecture (Americanizing it). IBM > later sold the ROLM CBX / PBX product back to SEIMENS for a handsome > profit. > SEIMENS then revised the o/s and architecture with it's own > German touch. Their new systems struggled mightly to hang on as third > most distributed voice switching platform in North America. Consumers > and system administrators were clearly NOT impressed with what had been > re-engineered or otherwise taken back to a Version 1.0 release. The > early versions of HICOM (SEIMENS revised ROLM) lost much of the market > it had locked into for years. Loyal customers were no longer loyal to > the ROLM name. A terrific interactive ROLM User Guide still exist and > serves those who still run on the american~ized ROLM 9751 9004 & 9005 > platforms. That web-site is http://www.9751.com > Joseph Bergstein wrote: >> In a message from Martin McCormick, he states: >>> The Rolm PBX'S are made by Seimens, as far as I know. >> ROLM PBX'x have been made by the Rolm Company since they were >> founded. As I recall, ROLM actually started out manufacturing >> MILSPEC Nova (Data General) computers in the early '70s. I recall >> seeing them as the console computer on early Amdahl 470 mainframes. >> Rolm PBXs up to and including the current 9751 are still made by >> ROLM. Since the ROLM - Siemens merger, and subsequent acquisition, >> the two firms indicate that they are merging their technology >> platforms, but so far Siemens does not make ROLM PBX's, per se >> (other than now owning the ROLM company). ------------------------------ From: hancock4@bbs.cpcn.com Subject: Re: Telemarketing to Cell Phones Date: 13 Dec 2004 07:34:23 -0800 Organization: http://groups.google.com jmeissen@aracnet.com wrote: > A thread in the local forsale newsgroup here has been debating the > legality of making telemarketing calls to cell phones (in the US). > While most people seem to believe it's NOT legal, no one has been > able to provide a specific reference. That's a good question. I also wonder if "exempt" calls -- political, charitable, survey polls, prior business relationships -- would be allowed to call cell phones. This is of particular interest to me because my cell phone is on a low use plan. I normally have it off during the day, but if I needed it on (ie waiting for a call from a doctor or an ill family member, for example) I could pay as much as $2.00 per minute plus taxes for an unwanted call*. Given the repetitive volume of such calls (as many as SEVEN a day during the voting season), I wouldn't be very happy paying $15 for calls I never asked for. Another rule I'm curious about is such prohibiting calls to nursing homes. I was told they're illegal, but in my own experience they happened and caused distress when they did**. Some phone solicitors use sophisticated equipment and databases, but others and small operators just scanning the phone book. There are services that search out new phone book listings and house sales and sell them to local businesses as potential new customers; some of those use the phone for their pitches. Those calls are by a real person (maybe the business owner) but they're just as annoying. There are also sleavy business people out there who simply lie when they make their phone calls. I get a call from time to time with the caller saying "we've done business in the past", something I know is absolutely a lie. But again, how much time can one devote to writing up a complaint report? Often times the authorities won't do anything with a single complaint, anyway. [public replies please] Notes: * The $2 is from roaming during peak times. Yes, I know there are cheaper deals, but my monthly fee is very low and almost never make such calls. It's just a backup in case I break down on a highway someplace. ** Supposedly you can report the offending caller and take action against them. However, when you're dealing with a sick family member in a nursing home, you have far more important things on your mind than making the appropriate notes, writing up a complaint, etc.. The family member is in no condition to record such a report. We ended up disconnecting the phone, which annoyed me greatly. ------------------------------ From: news01@jmatt.net Subject: Re: EarthLink High Speed Internet Service Ranked Highest Date: 13 Dec 2004 07:50:02 -0800 Organization: http://groups.google.com LSmithsonvqm@hotmail.com wrote: > I see. That is why I got a call this morning with AOL and Time Warner > babbling about how great the service they provide using Earthlink > lines is. I told the leaches that I would deal with Earthlink > directly. "Earthlink lines"? Is there really such an animal? I thought that for broadband access, Earthlink was just reselling DSL and cable service that was physically provided by somebody else. ------------------------------ From: Ringo Langly Subject: Re: Dropping SBC For a VoIP Solution -- Vonage or Packet8 ?? Date: 13 Dec 2004 08:02:05 -0800 Organization: http://groups.google.com Hi Isaiah, My DTA310 is plugged into my router, and AFAICT this is the only way to do it. Granted I can get with my ISP, have another IP added to my box, and connect it in tangent with my router with a hub, but this is not only a pain but will cost me extra both for the hub and for the extra IP. The way I have it now, though there's a log, works rather well. Ringo ------------------------------ From: Geoffrey Welsh Subject: Re: Radar Detectors Date: Mon, 13 Dec 2004 11:28:25 -0500 David Clayton wrote: > A few years ago on a major road in my city, a system was trialled > where computerised signs would advise drivers what speed to travel at > to get the "green wave" of traffic lights. Shouldn't that be the speed limit?!? Geoffrey Welsh ------------------------------ From: Jack Decker Date: Sun, 12 Dec 2004 21:27:46 -0500 Subject: A New Page of VoIP News Reply-To: VoIPnews@yahoogroups.com For those who still want VoIP News, I'm trying something experimentally using a new service I found -- take a look at this: http://michigantelephone.mi.org/voipnews.html Granted it's not like every item is hand-picked, but if you scan through the newest items once or twice a day you just might find something interesting. Basically this is a "set it up and pretty much forget it" service -- let's hope it lasts for a while (and doesn't start inserting ads or anything like that). How to Distribute VoIP Throughout a Home: http://michigantelephone.mi.org/distribute.html If you live in Michigan, subscribe to the MI-Telecom group: http://groups.yahoo.com/group/MI-Telecom/ ------------------------------ TELECOM Digest is an electronic journal devoted mostly but not exclusively to telecommunications topics. It is circulated anywhere there is email, in addition to various telecom forums on a variety of networks such as Compuserve and America On Line, Yahoo Groups, and other forums. It is also gatewayed to Usenet where it appears as the moderated newsgroup 'comp.dcom.telecom'. TELECOM Digest is a not-for-profit, mostly non-commercial educational service offered to the Internet by Patrick Townson. All the contents of the Digest are compilation-copyrighted. You may reprint articles in some other media on an occasional basis, but please attribute my work and that of the original author. Contact information: Patrick Townson/TELECOM Digest Post Office Box 50 Independence, KS 67301 Phone: 620-402-0134 Fax 1: 775-255-9970 Fax 2: 530-309-7234 Fax 3: 208-692-5145 Email: editor@telecom-digest.org Subscribe: telecom-subscribe@telecom-digest.org Unsubscribe:telecom-unsubscribe@telecom-digest.org This Digest is the oldest continuing e-journal about telecomm- unications on the Internet, having been founded in August, 1981 and published continuously since then. Our archives are available for your review/research. We believe we are the oldest e-zine/mailing list on the internet in any category! URL information: http://telecom-digest.org Anonymous FTP: mirror.lcs.mit.edu/telecom-archives/archives/ (or use our mirror site: ftp.epix.net/pub/telecom-archives) Email <==> FTP: telecom-archives@telecom-digest.org Send a simple, one line note to that automated address for a help file on how to use the automatic retrieval system for archives files. You can get desired files in email. ************************************************************************* * TELECOM Digest is partially funded by a grant from * * Judith Oppenheimer, President of ICB Inc. and purveyor of accurate * * 800 & Dot Com News, Intelligence, Analysis, and Consulting. * * http://ICBTollFree.com, http://1800TheExpert.com * * Views expressed herein should not be construed as representing * * views of Judith Oppenheimer or ICB Inc. * ************************************************************************* ICB Toll Free News. Contact information is not sold, rented or leased. One click a day feeds a person a meal. Go to http://www.thehungersite.com Copyright 2004 ICB, Inc. and TELECOM Digest. All rights reserved. Our attorney is Bill Levant, of Blue Bell, PA. ************************ DIRECTORY ASSISTANCE JUST 65 CENTS ONE OR TWO INQUIRIES CHARGED TO YOUR CREDIT CARD! REAL TIME, UP TO DATE! SPONSORED BY TELECOM DIGEST AND EASY411.COM SIGN UP AT http://www.easy411.com/telecomdigest ! ************************ --------------------------------------------------------------- Finally, the Digest is funded by gifts from generous readers such as yourself who provide funding in amounts deemed appropriate. Your help is important and appreciated. A suggested donation of fifty dollars per year per reader is considered appropriate. See our address above. Please make at least a single donation to cover the cost of processing your name to the mailing list. All opinions expressed herein are deemed to be those of the author. Any organizations listed are for identification purposes only and messages should not be considered any official expression by the organization. End of TELECOM Digest V23 #595 ****************************** From editor@telecom-digest.org Tue Dec 14 00:50:28 2004 Received: (from ptownson@localhost) by massis.lcs.mit.edu (8.11.6p3/8.11.6) id iBE5oRj23444; Tue, 14 Dec 2004 00:50:28 -0500 (EST) Date: Tue, 14 Dec 2004 00:50:28 -0500 (EST) From: editor@telecom-digest.org Message-Id: <200412140550.iBE5oRj23444@massis.lcs.mit.edu> X-Authentication-Warning: massis.lcs.mit.edu: ptownson set sender to editor@telecom-digest.org using -f To: ptownson Approved: patsnewlist Subject: TELECOM Digest V23 #596 TELECOM Digest Tue, 14 Dec 2004 00:50:00 EST Volume 23 : Issue 596 Inside This Issue: Editor: Patrick A. Townson USATODAY.com - Airborne Cell-Phone Ban Likely to Remain (Marcus Falco) $35 Billion Sprint-Nextel Merger May Close This Week (Telecom dailyLead) Telecom Lifecycle (jrefactors@hotmail.com) Cingular Migration (jrefactors@hotmail.com) What Exactly Did "Telstar" Do? (Lisa Hancock) Re: Strange Wireless Problem (Rich Greenberg) Re: Strange Wireless Problem (T. Sean Weintz) Re: Strange Wireless Problem (Kenneth P. Stox) Re: Strange Wireless Problem (A User) Re: Is 'Transitional Fair Use' The Wave Of The Future? (DevilsPGD) Re: Is 'Transitional Fair Use' The Wave Of The Future? (Tony P.) Re: Is 'Transitional Fair Use' The Wave Of The Future? (Barry Margolin) Re: Urban Legends Reference Pages: (Celling Your Soul) (Steve Sobol) Re: Radar Detectors (DevilsPGD) Re: Radar Detectors (-mhd) Re: Calling Card Needed - Short Interaction Sequence (DevilsPGD) Re: Calling Card Needed - Short Interaction Sequence (Clark W. Griswold) Re: Unlimited Calling Plan to India (Vishay) Re: Vonage Voice Quality Getting Worse (Flatus Ohlfahrt) Telecom and VOIP (Voice over Internet Protocol) Digest for the Internet. All contents here are copyrighted by Patrick Townson and the individual writers/correspondents. Articles may be used in other journals or newsgroups, provided the writer's name and the Digest are included in the fair use quote. By using -any name or email address- included herein for -any- reason other than responding to an article herein, you agree to pay a hundred dollars to the recipients of the email. =========================== Addresses herein are not to be added to any mailing list, nor to be sold or given away without explicit written consent. Chain letters, viruses, porn, spam, and miscellaneous junk are definitely unwelcome. We must fight spam for the same reason we fight crime: not because we are naive enough to believe that we will ever stamp it out, but because we do not want the kind of world that results when no one stands against crime. Geoffrey Welsh =========================== See the bottom of this issue for subscription and archive details and the name of our lawyer; other stuff of interest. ---------------------------------------------------------------------- Date: Mon, 13 Dec 2004 20:36:58 -0500 From: Marcus Didius Falco Subject: USATODAY.com - Airborne cell-phone ban likely to remain for now Which newspaper do you want to believe? http://www.usatoday.com/travel/news/2004-12-13-wireless-planes_x.htm WASHINGTON (Reuters) Hopes and worries that regulators will soon end the ban on using wireless phones during U.S. commercial flights are likely at least a year or two early, government officials and analysts say. The U.S. Federal Communications Commission Wednesday plans to seek public comment on whether to ease or lift its prohibition on the use of wireless phones and two-way communications devices such as Blackberrys while in the air. FCC officials stressed that it could take at least a year to lift the agency's ban. And there still is a prohibition by the Federal Aviation Administration, which could take another year to ease. The agencies are moving cautiously because of concerns the communications would interfere with operating a plane and could overwhelm wireless systems on the ground. There are also questions about whether it's technically feasible to support thousands of calls from the air. There are almost 173 million wireless phone subscribers, according to industry estimates. "We hope to complete our work as expeditiously as possible, but anything we do here at the FCC doesn't alter the rules at the FAA," FCC spokeswoman Lauren Patrich said. To guard aircraft safety, the FAA forbids the cabin use of devices that intentionally emit radio waves, like wireless phones and computers that can communicate with each other. A technical advisory group is to report back next year on whether these restrictions should be changed, FAA spokesman Paul Takemoto said. Other electronic devices, like music players and standard laptops, which can unintentionally cause interference, are permitted once the aircraft rises above 10,000 feet. Usually, flight attendants tell passengers once the plane reaches that altitude and those devices can be used. Gearing up for competition While the bans are debated, the FCC plans to push rules Wednesday aimed at boosting competition for air-to-ground telephone and high-speed Internet services with frequencies now used by phones embedded in plane seats, agency officials said. A Verizon Communications unit is the major provider of air-to-ground telephones on U.S. commercial flights. Others bowed out over the last few years because consumers, in part, balked at the high prices. Verizon's Airfone service typically costs $3.99 a minute plus a $3.99 connection fee per domestic voice call. It also offers some data services for a fee. Airlines, rival wireless companies and aircraft maker Boeing are salivating at the prospect of more in-flight communications services, including high-speed Internet, or broadband, to meet travelers' demands. The additional fees the airlines and providers could charge for those services would be a boon to the ailing airline industry, which is enduring fare wars and high fuel prices. "Today the high cost of wireless when flying has kept the users low," telecommunications analyst Jeff Kagan said. "But once the cost drops or once you can use your own phone on board, the quiet air cabin may be a thing of the past." Kagan, who does a lot of traveling, said he loves and hates the idea of making and receiving calls during a flight. "We should be very careful before opening this up," he said. "Just think how annoying it is to hear the person behind you shouting to his neighbor when you are trying to work or read or sleep." Boeing and a private company, AirCell, have urged the FCC to auction two air-to-ground wireless licenses and limit bidders to winning only one to ensure competition. The airlines want the FCC to ensure enough spectrum is sold so that a provider can meet the demand for airborne broadband. "Although the demand for voice services has declined over the past few years, the demand for data services continues to increase," Continental Airlines told the FCC in September. Copyright 2004 Reuters Limited. Copyright 2004 USA TODAY, a division of Gannett Co. Inc. NOTE: For more telecom/internet/networking/computer news from the daily media, check out our feature 'Telecom Digest Extra' each day at http://telecom-digest.org/td-extra . New articles daily. *** FAIR USE NOTICE. This message contains copyrighted material the use of which has not been specifically authorized by the copyright owner. This Internet discussion group is making it available without profit to group members who have expressed a prior interest in receiving the included information in their efforts to advance the understanding of literary, educational, political, and economic issues, for non-profit research and educational purposes only. I believe that this constitutes a 'fair use' of the copyrighted material as provided for in section 107 of the U.S. Copyright Law. If you wish to use this copyrighted material for purposes of your own that go beyond 'fair use,' you must obtain permission from the copyright owner, in this instance USA Today and Reuters News Service. For more information go to: http://www.law.cornell.edu/uscode/17/107.shtml ------------------------------ Date: Mon, 13 Dec 2004 13:28:24 EST From: Telecom dailyLead from USTA Subject: 35 billion Sprint-Nextel merger may close this week Telecom dailyLead from USTA December 13, 2004 http://www.dailylead.com/latestIssue.jsp?i=18081&l=2017006 TODAY'S HEADLINES NEWS OF THE DAY * $35 billion Sprint-Nextel merger may close this week BUSINESS & INDUSTRY WATCH * Analysis: AOL pushes free content to the fore * Video a big part of SBC's future * Cable gears up for 2005 USTA SPOTLIGHT * USTA Webinar: USF & USAC, Funding Updates, Tuesday, Dec. 14, 2004, 1:30 p.m. EMERGING TECHNOLOGIES * Consumers cold on mobile multimedia REGULATORY & LEGISLATIVE * Global Crossing former chair avoids SEC fine * FCC to vote on phone rules Follow the link below to read quick summaries of these stories and others. http://www.dailylead.com/latestIssue.jsp?i=18081&l=2017006 Legal and Privacy information at http://www.dailylead.com/about/privacy_legal.jsp SmartBrief, Inc. 1100 H ST NW, Suite 1000 Washington, DC 20005 ------------------------------ From: jrefactors@hotmail.com Subject: Telecom Lifecycle Date: 13 Dec 2004 10:11:58 -0800 Organization: http://groups.google.com I want to ask the phases of telecom lifecyle is like this? I tried to find more info in the web but couldn't. sales->ordering->provisioning->billing? Please advise. Thanks!! ------------------------------ From: jrefactors@hotmail.com Subject: Cingular Migration Date: 13 Dec 2004 10:10:50 -0800 Organization: http://groups.google.com Cingular and AT&T Wireless are migrated, does it mean they are one company? But how come there are advertisments saying current AT&T Wireless customers can migrate to Cingular? I am confused, and don't know how the telecom business works. Please advise. Thanks. ------------------------------ From: hancock4@bbs.cpcn.com Subject: What Exactly Did "Telstar" Do? Date: 13 Dec 2004 11:12:28 -0800 Organization: http://groups.google.com In the 1960s, the Bell System launche d a pioneer communications satellite known as Telstar. The event had great fanfare. People would be told when and where to look for the tiny dot of light passing in the night sky, and go out to see it. Models of it appeared in museums. While there are generalities written about it, I was curious about some day to day technical details. I am curious as to what exactly did Telstar do, once they got it up and running. That is, did it handle domestic voice long distance calls? Overseas calls? Telegraph/ data signals? Television programs, either domestic or overseas? Did it have an orbit fixed above one point of the earth or its own moving orbit? How was Telstar controlled? That is, I presume any call handled via Telstar could also be handled by more conventional means, and backup was necessary in case Telstar wasn't working for some reason. Did engineers manually route transmissions and babysit them? Was Telstar a production unit, expected to be a workaday medium, or just an experiment to see how satellite communications would work? (During overseas calls of the 1930s, engineers did have to monitor every call in progress and adjust frequencies and even bands (shortwave or longwave) to compensate for atmospheric conditions affecting the radio. There were advantages and disadvantages for both shortwave and longwave and both were used. I don't think these were ever resolved until undersea cables came into use.) How long did Telstar stay in service? I recall a Telstar II replacing it, but then the mystiq of satellites waned. Thanks. [public replies please] ------------------------------ From: richgr@panix.com (Rich Greenberg) Subject: Re: Strange Wireless Problem Date: 13 Dec 2004 13:36:47 -0500 Organization: Organized? Me? In article , Matt B. wrote: > Hello all, > I'm having a strange problem and I hope you can help ... A few > co-workers are using wireless-enabled laptops. They are able to > receive e-mail from the POP3 server, but are unable to send. They get > the error "The server has timed out ... might be server problems, > etc.." If they plug in to a wired connection, it works fine. > Everyone is using Outlook 2000 or 2003. It doesn't matter where they > are using the wireless connection -- at home, at the office, at > great-grandma Edna's ... it all does the same thing ... and we are at > a loss! Any suggestions would be greatly appreciated! This is just a WAG, but the SMTP server may be set up to not accept incoming wireless connections, or to accept them only on a different port than the usual 25. Talk to the security admin at the server site. Rich Greenberg Marietta, GA, USA richgr atsign panix.com + 1 770 321 6507 Eastern time zone. I speak for myself & my dogs only. VM'er since CP-67 Canines:Val, Red & Shasta (RIP),Red, husky Owner:Chinook-L Atlanta Siberian Husky Rescue. www.panix.com/~richgr/Asst Owner:Sibernet-L ------------------------------ From: T. Sean Weintz Subject: Re: Strange Wireless Problem Date: Mon, 13 Dec 2004 14:00:43 -0500 Organization: Posted via Supernews, http://www.supernews.com Matt B. wrote: > Hello all, > I'm having a strange problem and I hope you can help ... A few > co-workers are using wireless-enabled laptops. They are able to > receive e-mail from the POP3 server, but are unable to send. They get > the error "The server has timed out ... might be server problems, > etc.." If they plug in to a wired connection, it works fine. > Everyone is using Outlook 2000 or 2003. It doesn't matter where they > are using the wireless connection -- at home, at the office, at > great-grandma Edna's ... it all does the same thing ... and we are at > a loss! Any suggestions would be greatly appreciated! > Thanks, > Matt B. > e-mail: moc.oohay@02091bttam <--Blocked ... reverse it Need more details. Considering that POP3 is not used to send mail, only to retrieve it from the mailbox, there is obviously more to the equation than what you have stated here. The problem lies with the SMTP server (the server used to send mail). it MAY be the same server as the pop3 server, may not be. But things to consider : #1) if the server is behind a firewall, is port25 (the smtp port) open to users from the wireless network? #2) DO not plan on being able to send mail via the server from non-work networks!!!!!! I cannot stress this enough! If you configure the server to allow this, then it will be what is known as an "open relay" and will be noticed by spammers very quickly. They will then proceed to use it to send spam. And then the anti spam folks will notice this, and will blacklist your server. ------------------------------ From: Kenneth P. Stox Organization: Ministry of Silly Walks Subject: Re: Strange Wireless Problem Date: Mon, 13 Dec 2004 19:21:06 GMT Matt B. wrote: > Hello all, > I'm having a strange problem and I hope you can help ... A few > co-workers are using wireless-enabled laptops. They are able to > receive e-mail from the POP3 server, but are unable to send. They get > the error "The server has timed out ... might be server problems, > etc.." If they plug in to a wired connection, it works fine. > Everyone is using Outlook 2000 or 2003. It doesn't matter where they > are using the wireless connection -- at home, at the office, at > great-grandma Edna's ... it all does the same thing ... and we are at > a loss! Any suggestions would be greatly appreciated! You need to check your smtp settings, pop is inbound only. ------------------------------ From: A User Subject: Re: Strange Wireless Problem Date: Tue, 14 Dec 2004 06:43:23 +1000 Organization: Posted via Forte APN, http://www.forteinc.com/apn/index.php On Mon, 13 Dec 2004 07:29:11 -0500, Matt B. wrote: > Hello all, > I'm having a strange problem and I hope you can help ... A few > co-workers are using wireless-enabled laptops. They are able to > receive e-mail from the POP3 server, but are unable to send. They get > the error "The server has timed out ... might be server problems, > etc.." If they plug in to a wired connection, it works fine. > Everyone is using Outlook 2000 or 2003. It doesn't matter where they > are using the wireless connection -- at home, at the office, at > great-grandma Edna's ... it all does the same thing ... and we are at > a loss! Any suggestions would be greatly appreciated! > Thanks, > Matt B. > e-mail: moc.oohay@02091bttam <--Blocked...reverse it You need to use the SMTP server of the the ISP you are on, or it will be blocked. This is normal antispam behaviour. ------------------------------ From: DevilsPGD Subject: Re: Is 'Transitional Fair Use' The Wave Of The Future? Date: Mon, 13 Dec 2004 12:05:51 -0700 Organization: Posted via Supernews, http://www.supernews.com In message Monty Solomon wrote: > Viewers would be able to record an episode with their DVR, but there > would be a time limit on how long it would be available for viewing. > The executive was pushing for an expiration date that coincided with > the premiere of the next episode. The consensus of the cable > executived was that it needed to be between 2-4 weeks. Interesting. Maybe it's just me, but the way I see if, if they're going to work so hard at making sure I can't watch their programming, maybe I should save them the trouble, honour their request up front and not watch it? For recreational use only. ------------------------------ From: Tony P. Subject: Re: Is 'Transitional Fair Use' The Wave Of The Future? Organization: ATCC Date: Mon, 13 Dec 2004 18:05:49 -0500 In article , monty@roscom.com says: > Is 'Transitional Fair Use' The Wave Of The Future? > Written By Rick Ellis, Monday, November 28th, 2004 > When HBO's "Six Feet Under" returns in 2005, it won't just be the end > of a long-running hit series. It may also be a turning point for TV > viewers who are in the habit of recording shows to watch weeks or even > months later. > Sources at two different cable companies have told AllYourTV.com that > discussions have begun which will may lead to a restriction of use for > fans of several popular television shows. > The discussions are reportedly in very early stages, and the details > are still very broad. But this is what I can confirm at this date. > A middle-level executive at Time Warner has approached several cable > companies and broached the idea of restricting the ability of > customers who use those company's Digital Video Recorders to record > several popular Time Warner TV programs. > The term being used by the executive is "transitional fair use," and > the scenerio laid out goes roughly along these lines: > Viewers would be able to record an episode with their DVR, but there > would be a time limit on how long it would be available for viewing. > The executive was pushing for an expiration date that coincided with > the premiere of the next episode. The consensus of the cable > executived was that it needed to be between 2-4 weeks. > http://www.allyourtv.com/0405season/news/november/11282004transitional.html If they succeed in doing so I vow not to buy a new television or any new AV gear. They have no right to infringe my right to time shift programs should I wish. As far as I'm concerned the media industry has made record profit over the last thirty years even when you factor in the VCR and outright piracy. Perhaps if Hollywood took a few risks I'd be willing to go to the movies more frequently. But everything now is just a re-hash, as evidenced by War of the Worlds and Charlie and the Chocolate Factory. Granted, the Hithchikers Guide to the Galaxy movie is coming so I might want to see that. But everything else is just contrived crap made by people who want to keep their career in the movies all comfy and safe. ------------------------------ From: Barry Margolin Subject: Re: Is 'Transitional Fair Use' The Wave Of The Future? Organization: Symantec Date: Mon, 13 Dec 2004 19:26:40 -0500 In article , Monty Solomon wrote: > A middle-level executive at Time Warner has approached several cable > companies and broached the idea of restricting the ability of > customers who use those company's Digital Video Recorders to record > several popular Time Warner TV programs. Sounds like another good reason to support standalone DVRs, like ReplayTV and TiVo, rather than cableco-supplied DVR services. Barry Margolin, barmar@alum.mit.edu Arlington, MA *** PLEASE post questions in newsgroups, not directly to me *** ------------------------------ From: Steve Sobol Subject: Re: Urban Legends Reference Pages: Politics (Celling Your Soul) Date: Mon, 13 Dec 2004 12:17:28 -0800 Organization: Glorb Internet Services, http://www.glorb.com Tony P. wrote: > In article , dvanhorn@dvanhorn.org > says: >> One thing I've noticed lately, is a lot of telemarketing calls from >> Quebec. Note that Canadian telemarketers are not bound by US law. > I've noted the same thing. Is there some particular reason this occurs? Because they aren't bound by US law ... JustThe.net Internet & New Media Services, http://JustThe.net/ Steven J. Sobol, Geek In Charge / 888.480.4NET (4638) / sjsobol@JustThe.net PGP Key available from your friendly local key server (0xE3AE35ED) Apple Valley, California Nothing scares me anymore. I have three kids. ------------------------------ From: DevilsPGD Subject: Re: Radar Detectors Date: Mon, 13 Dec 2004 12:05:50 -0700 Organization: Posted via Supernews, http://www.supernews.com In message Geoffrey Welsh wrote: >> A few years ago on a major road in my city, a system was trialled >> where computerised signs would advise drivers what speed to travel at >> to get the "green wave" of traffic lights. > Shouldn't that be the speed limit?!? Traffic light timing changes throughout the day (and in some cases, dynamically based on traffic) -- this is unique, since it effectively dynamically changes the speed limit (and this limit was not enforced). For recreational use only. ------------------------------ From: -mhd Subject: Re: Radar Detectors Date: Mon, 13 Dec 2004 23:36:12 -0500 Geoffrey Welsh wrote: > David Clayton wrote: >> A few years ago on a major road in my city, a system was trialled >> where computerised signs would advise drivers what speed to travel at >> to get the "green wave" of traffic lights. > Shouldn't that be the speed limit?!? > Geoffrey Welsh Sure, if you are maintaining a constant speed. However in the real world traffic conditions can momentarily upset your average speed and you may have had a standing start from a previous light. Anyone remember the Halda Speedpilot used by rallyists? http://www.geocities.com/haldaman.geo/halda3.html -mhd ------------------------------ From: DevilsPGD Subject: Re: Calling Card Needed -- Short Interaction Sequence Date: Mon, 13 Dec 2004 12:05:50 -0700 Organization: Posted via Supernews, http://www.supernews.com In message Joseph wrote: >>> Then their billing arrangement is broken. The FCC regs are that the >>> pay phone operator gets their kickback of (usually about $0.30 [a]) >>> for _each_ call. If you (typically) hit the " * " button on the keypad >>> to tell your phonecard service to let you make a second call without >>> having to hangup and redial the whole kit and kaboodle, the FCC regs >>> treat that one as, yes, a second call, with an additional $0.30. >> Interesting, do you know what defines when a second call starts? > Why is this such a difficult question? You finish one call and begin > another one. When the second call answers the second call starts. Say I phone my girlfriend while I'm out of town, we chat, then she transfers the call to my parents. Is this the same phone call, or a different phone call? For recreational use only. ------------------------------ From: Clark W. Griswold, Jr. Subject: Re: Calling Card Needed -- Short Interaction Sequence Date: Mon, 13 Dec 2004 18:06:56 -0700 Organization: Posted via Supernews, http://www.supernews.com Joseph wrote: > When the second call answers the second call starts. And the more technical response would be "when the call supervises". ------------------------------ From: vijay.vishy@gmail.com Subject: Re: Unlimited Calling Plan to India Date: 13 Dec 2004 12:26:44 -0800 India doesnt have Unlimited local or unlimited India-Longdistance. The city where my parents live doesnt have unlimited internet facility or even broadband. I can pay 150$ per month for unlimited india calling plan [even if it is unlimited only during night 12 hours / day] ------------------------------ From: Flatus Ohlfahrt Subject: Re: Vonage Voice Quality Getting Worse? Date: 13 Dec 2004 19:23:03 GMT Organization: USAF Ret On Mon, 13 Dec 2004 02:24:47 GMT, Mark Roberts wrote in news:telecom23.595.9@telecom-digest.org: > John R Levine had written: >> Have other people had voice quality problems with Vonage? > Usually, no. When it does happen, it seems to happen with > calls to certain rural areas (one in Missouri, in > particular). A second try at placing the calls usually > clears them up. > ATA-186 behind a Linksys router with QoS enabled. In August a kind soul reported that there is a problem with the stock firmware supplied with Vonage's ATA-186s. I emailed Vonage tech support and they flashed my ATA with an update that solved the problem. I also made sure that QoS was enabled for my ethernet cards, etc. Here is the message that was posted in August: On Sat, 21 Aug 2004 06:34:56 GMT, Cheetoh wrote in news:10idr89jr1ev410@corp.supernews.com: > So it turns out that the current firmware Vonage is using > on the Cisco ATA186's has a bug that puts a 0x0 > value in the IP Precedence field, so instead of sending > voip bearer packets with an IP Precendence 5 they > are sent with 0, like all data. I have worked with them > and they have loaded a test image and it works > like a champ now and my LLQ is working great in case any > one else is trying to do this... > LLQ-router# show voice queuing > Ethernet1 > Service-policy output: shape > Class-map: class-default (match-any) > 365625 packets, 66899306 bytes > 30 second offered rate 591000 bps, drop rate 0 bps > Match: any > Traffic Shaping > Target/Average Byte Sustain Excess > Interval > Increment > Rate Limit bits/int bits/int (ms) > (bytes) > 1100000/1100000 6600 26400 26400 24 > 3300 > Adapt Queue Packets Bytes Packets > Bytes > Shaping > Active Depth Delayed > Delayed > Active > - 3 361289 66615027 11338 > 13704219 yes > Service-policy : LLQ > Class-map: call-setup (match-all) > 5675 packets, 1804013 bytes > 30 second offered rate 0 bps, drop rate 0 bps > Match: ip precedence 3 > Queueing > Output Queue: Conversation 73 > Bandwidth 5 (%) > Bandwidth 55 (kbps) Max Threshold 64 (packets) > (pkts matched/bytes matched) 25/8990 > (depth/total drops/no-buffer drops) 0/0/0 > Class-map: voice (match-all) > 129981 packets, 18261798 bytes > 30 second offered rate 0 bps, drop rate 0 bps > Match: ip precedence 5 > Queueing > Strict Priority > Output Queue: Conversation 72 > Bandwidth 165 (kbps) Burst 4125 (Bytes) > (pkts matched/bytes matched) 1349/279958 > (total drops/bytes drops) 0/0 > Class-map: class-default (match-any) > 229969 packets, 46833495 bytes > 30 second offered rate 592000 bps, drop rate 0 > bps Match: any > Queueing > Flow Based Fair Queueing > Maximum Number of Hashed Queues 64 > (total queued/total drops/no-buffer drops) 3/0/0 ------------------------------ TELECOM Digest is an electronic journal devoted mostly but not exclusively to telecommunications topics. It is circulated anywhere there is email, in addition to various telecom forums on a variety of networks such as Compuserve and America On Line, Yahoo Groups, and other forums. It is also gatewayed to Usenet where it appears as the moderated newsgroup 'comp.dcom.telecom'. TELECOM Digest is a not-for-profit, mostly non-commercial educational service offered to the Internet by Patrick Townson. All the contents of the Digest are compilation-copyrighted. You may reprint articles in some other media on an occasional basis, but please attribute my work and that of the original author. Contact information: Patrick Townson/TELECOM Digest Post Office Box 50 Independence, KS 67301 Phone: 620-402-0134 Fax 1: 775-255-9970 Fax 2: 530-309-7234 Fax 3: 208-692-5145 Email: editor@telecom-digest.org Subscribe: telecom-subscribe@telecom-digest.org Unsubscribe:telecom-unsubscribe@telecom-digest.org This Digest is the oldest continuing e-journal about telecomm- unications on the Internet, having been founded in August, 1981 and published continuously since then. Our archives are available for your review/research. We believe we are the oldest e-zine/mailing list on the internet in any category! URL information: http://telecom-digest.org Anonymous FTP: mirror.lcs.mit.edu/telecom-archives/archives/ (or use our mirror site: ftp.epix.net/pub/telecom-archives) Email <==> FTP: telecom-archives@telecom-digest.org Send a simple, one line note to that automated address for a help file on how to use the automatic retrieval system for archives files. You can get desired files in email. ************************************************************************* * TELECOM Digest is partially funded by a grant from * * Judith Oppenheimer, President of ICB Inc. and purveyor of accurate * * 800 & Dot Com News, Intelligence, Analysis, and Consulting. * * http://ICBTollFree.com, http://1800TheExpert.com * * Views expressed herein should not be construed as representing * * views of Judith Oppenheimer or ICB Inc. * ************************************************************************* ICB Toll Free News. Contact information is not sold, rented or leased. One click a day feeds a person a meal. Go to http://www.thehungersite.com Copyright 2004 ICB, Inc. and TELECOM Digest. All rights reserved. Our attorney is Bill Levant, of Blue Bell, PA. ************************ DIRECTORY ASSISTANCE JUST 65 CENTS ONE OR TWO INQUIRIES CHARGED TO YOUR CREDIT CARD! REAL TIME, UP TO DATE! SPONSORED BY TELECOM DIGEST AND EASY411.COM SIGN UP AT http://www.easy411.com/telecomdigest ! ************************ --------------------------------------------------------------- Finally, the Digest is funded by gifts from generous readers such as yourself who provide funding in amounts deemed appropriate. Your help is important and appreciated. A suggested donation of fifty dollars per year per reader is considered appropriate. See our address above. Please make at least a single donation to cover the cost of processing your name to the mailing list. All opinions expressed herein are deemed to be those of the author. Any organizations listed are for identification purposes only and messages should not be considered any official expression by the organization. End of TELECOM Digest V23 #596 ****************************** From editor@telecom-digest.org Tue Dec 14 15:51:43 2004 Received: (from ptownson@localhost) by massis.lcs.mit.edu (8.11.6p3/8.11.6) id iBEKphF03245; Tue, 14 Dec 2004 15:51:43 -0500 (EST) Date: Tue, 14 Dec 2004 15:51:43 -0500 (EST) From: editor@telecom-digest.org Message-Id: <200412142051.iBEKphF03245@massis.lcs.mit.edu> X-Authentication-Warning: massis.lcs.mit.edu: ptownson set sender to editor@telecom-digest.org using -f To: ptownson Approved: patsnewlist Subject: TELECOM Digest V23 #597 TELECOM Digest Tue, 14 Dec 2004 15:52:00 EST Volume 23 : Issue 597 Inside This Issue: Editor: Patrick A. Townson Will the Sprint/Nextel Merger Bring the End of Motorola? (John Stahl) Cellphones Aloft: The Inevitable Is Closer (Monty Solomon) Verizon Mulls Sprint Acquisition (Telecom dailyLead from USTA) Telecom Terms (Venkat) Re: Dialogic JCT Series (David) Re: What Exactly Did "Telstar" Do? (John Levine) Re: What Exactly Did "Telstar" Do? (Charles G Gray) Re: Strange Wireless Problem (J.P. Wing) Re: Urban Legends Reference Pages: (Celling Your Soul) (Mark Atwood) Re: 35 Billion Sprint-Nextel Merger May Close This Week (Kenneth P Stox) Re: Radar Detectors (Rick Merrill) Re: Is 'Transitional Fair Use' The Wave Of The Future? (John Bartley) Re: Broadcast Fax Provider? (T. Sean Weintz) Re: Calling Card Needed -- Short Interaction Sequence (Scott Dorsey) Re: Cingular Migration (John Levine) Re: Cingular Migration (Tony P.) Re: Cingular Migration (Justin Time) Re: Cingular Migration (Daniel J McDonald) Telecom and VOIP (Voice over Internet Protocol) Digest for the Internet. All contents here are copyrighted by Patrick Townson and the individual writers/correspondents. Articles may be used in other journals or newsgroups, provided the writer's name and the Digest are included in the fair use quote. By using -any name or email address- included herein for -any- reason other than responding to an article herein, you agree to pay a hundred dollars to the recipients of the email. =========================== Addresses herein are not to be added to any mailing list, nor to be sold or given away without explicit written consent. Chain letters, viruses, porn, spam, and miscellaneous junk are definitely unwelcome. We must fight spam for the same reason we fight crime: not because we are naive enough to believe that we will ever stamp it out, but because we do not want the kind of world that results when no one stands against crime. Geoffrey Welsh =========================== See the bottom of this issue for subscription and archive details and the name of our lawyer; other stuff of interest. ---------------------------------------------------------------------- Date: Tue, 14 Dec 2004 07:02:43 -0500 From: John Stahl Subject: Will the Sprint/Nextel Merger Bring the End of Motorola? Just like the phrase often heard: "The check's in the mail." The oft used of late in most every merger and/or acquisition, phrase has been: "This acquisition or merger will have absolutely no effect on operations." This phrase has been shown to be, in almost every case, untrue as the reports all indicate! Here is another by-product of another upcoming telecom industry merger, coming to light before the completion, which could very well be ... "the straw which breaks the 'camel's' back for Motorola." As a side note, one might also wonder as with the recent announcement from Cingular that quite a large number of (redundant?) AT&T Wireless workers will be let go, how many Nextel workers will be getting pink slips from Sprint? > Motorola May Lose Big Customer if Nextel Merges > By KEN BELSON NY Times > Published: December 14, 2004 > Sprint's negotiations to buy Nextel have ignited fears that Motorola will > lose its exclusive deal to supply phones and equipment to Nextel. > If a merger occurs, she (Ms. Kalla) and other industry analysts say, > Sprint will induce Nextel's more than 15 million subscribers to turn in > their handsets, which use an unconventional technology called iDEN. > Sprint is likely to encourage these customers to buy its handsets, which > use a more common technology known as C.D.M.A., or code division multiple > access. And to handle the influx of millions of extra customers, Sprint > will probably have to order more equipment from Lucent, Nortel and other > vendors. > Ms. Kalla said she expected Sprint to take as long as five years to shut > down the iDEN network, giving it time to expand its C.D.M.A. network > without pressuring Nextel customers to swap handsets. Complete article at NY Times web site (free registration required): http://www.nytimes.com/2004/12/14/technology/14phone.html?th John Stahl Aljon Enterprises Telecom/Data Consultant [TELECOM Digest Editor's Note: You see, the phrase 'no change in operations' is true to them ... none of them realize what miserable screw ups they are where customer service is concerned. When they say 'no change in operations' that's what they mean. PAT] ------------------------------ Date: Tue, 14 Dec 2004 08:42:36 -0500 From: Monty Solomon Subject: Cellphones Aloft: The Inevitable Is Closer By KEN BELSON and MICHELINE MAYNARD The day may finally be coming when you will be allowed to nmake calls on your own cellphone from an airliner. Trouble is, so will the passengers sitting on either side of you, and in front and in back of you, as well. Federal regulators plan next week to begin considering rules that would end the official ban on cellphone use on commercial flights. Technical challenges and safety questions remain. But if the ban is lifted, one of the last cocoons of relative social silence would disappear, forcing strangers to work out the rough etiquette of involuntary eavesdropping in a confined space. http://www.nytimes.com/2004/12/10/technology/10phone.html [TELECOM Digest Editor's Note: But, as was pointed out here in the Digest yesterday, quoting USA Today, it may be a long time before we actually get to that point. PAT] ------------------------------ Date: Tue, 14 Dec 2004 12:26:29 EST From: Telecom dailyLead from USTA Subject: Verizon Mulls Sprint Acquisition Telecom dailyLead from USTA December 14, 2004 http://www.dailylead.com/latestIssue.jsp?i=18102&l=2017006 TODAY'S HEADLINES NEWS OF THE DAY * Verizon mulls Sprint acquisition BUSINESS & INDUSTRY WATCH * Analysis: Sprint, Nextel merger plays to strengths * Qwest hits DSL milestone * Z-Tel turns to VoIP USTA SPOTLIGHT * SUPERCOMM: TIA's and USTA's Premiere Event EMERGING TECHNOLOGIES * Wi-Fi ubiquity poses problems for cell carriers * Vote for VoIP poll: VoIP is ready for the mainstream REGULATORY & LEGISLATIVE * International Telecommunication Union issues broadband guidelines * Federal attorneys may seize Rigas family's cable assets Follow the link below to read quick summaries of these stories and others. http://www.dailylead.com/latestIssue.jsp?i=18102&l=2017006 Legal and Privacy information at http://www.dailylead.com/about/privacy_legal.jsp SmartBrief, Inc. 1100 H ST NW, Suite 1000 Washington, DC 20005 ------------------------------ From: Venkat Subject: Telecom Terms Date: Wed, 15 Dec 2004 00:46:04 +0530 Organization: Cisco Systems Inc. Hi All, I am new to telecom and I would appreciate if you people can give me definitions of each of the following terms (I am not looking for expansion of acronyms, but some explanation), and their use and also some real world examples where it is used, you can also point me to some good sites. Analog Telephony ------------------ Telephone ----- ? Local Loop -----? Void Switch CO(Central Office) PBX(Private Branch Exchange) Trunks Telephone Signalling Supervisory signaling Addressing Pulse DTMF : Dual Tone MultiFrequency Foreign Exchange Trunks FXO : Foreign Exchange Office FXS : Foreign Exchange Station DID DOD Loop Start Signalling Ground Start Signalling E&M Wink start Immediate start Delay start Digital Voice Technology ------------------------ Analog versus Digital Digitizing Analog Signal Digital to Analog Conversion process Voice Compression Techniques G.711, G.729 etc Channel Signalling Types T1/DS1 E1 Digital Channel Signalling Types CAS CCS TDM : Time Division Multiplexing ISDN Q.930/931 Messages Q.SIG Protocol SS7 I understand its a lot of work, but it should prove a real source of information for a beginner. Regards, Venkat [TELECOM Digest Editor's Note: For starters, 'tele-phone' is a combin- ation of 'phonic' which has to do with hearing, and 'tele' which refers to communication or transfer of information. 'Tele-gram' is made up of two parts, one of which comes from 'grap' or visual inspection of 'tele' or the transfer of information. If something is 'very graphic' it means it is 'a lot to look at'. So when you use a 'telephone' you communicate information by hearing and speaking; when you use a 'telegraph' you communicate information by reading. But what you may wish to review for many terms used in telephony and computers in general is to look at http://telecom-digest.org and review the dictionary and acronymns files therein. That's not complete either, but a good start on many terms. PAT] ------------------------------ From: David Reply-To: FlyLikeAnEagle@United.Com Subject: Re: Dialogic JCT Series Date: Tue, 14 Dec 2004 04:19:55 GMT Maverick, A quick search on those boards will find the Intel site with far too much reading material. On the pages that show the cards you are intersted in, look for the SDK or software pages. The old package and easiest to find is "SR 5.1.1". The new package is called "SR 6.0". These are the new interfaces (APIs) that work across most of the Intel Dialogic boards, including the JCT boards. The hardware specs can be found on the page that shows all the Dialogic boards. A google search on "D41JCT D82JCTU" will lead you to the page I am referring to. The easiest way to get started with this stuff is to contact one of the support/resellers for Intel. It isn't easy getting the price and facts directly from Intel. My reseller (Cygcom) was able to provide some good starting help and point me to the various Intel sites that don't seem to have links google will find. David On Mon, 13 Dec 2004 12:26:24 UTC, Maverick wrote: > Hi, > I am interested in knowing the capabilities of Dialogic JCT series > boards. Can any one please tell me if the JCT boards specially the low > density boards ( for instance VFX/41JCT or D/41JCT-LS ) will provide > the following: > - PABX integration ( which PABXs can be integrated ) > - support of VoIP/GSM ( the data sheet tells us that such boards > support GSM and 7.26, but how do I access it..??? ) > Any help in this regard is appreciated. > Thanks in Advance. > Maverick ------------------------------ Date: 14 Dec 2004 07:46:50 -0000 From: John Levine Subject: Re: What Exactly Did "Telstar" Do? Organization: I.E.C.C., Trumansburg NY USA > Was Telstar a production unit, expected to be a workaday medium, or > just an experiment to see how satellite communications would work? The latter. It was an AT&T ratepayer funded technology experiment. They'd already had some success with the Echo I satellite which was just a big mylar balloon. Telstar had an amplifier and ran uplink and downlink on separate frequencies. I think it was the first satellite to use solar cells and nicads. Since it was in LEO, it wasn't very useful for telephony since it was only visible both from Maine and from Britain or France for 20 minutes at a time. They did experiments with voice and telex but what most people remember is TV, since it was used to transmit the first live TV across the Atlantic. It was only 20 minutes at a time, but since the satellite's orbit was known, the 20 minutes could be slotted into TV schedules. (Before that, transatlantic TV involved video tapes and airplanes.) I get the impression that Telsat just did what it did, and all of the operations were on the ground at the three ground stations which had movable dishes to track Telsat as it passed overhead. Telstar only worked for about six months, apparently damaged by radiation from above ground nuke tests. There was a second larger Telstar II in 1963 in a higher but still not synchronous orbit, which ended AT&T's satellite program. By that time, Congress had chartered Comsat as the national satellite operator. They launched Intelsat I aka Early Bird into synchronous orbit in 1965, which started the modern communication satellite era, John R. Levine, IECC, POB 727, Trumansburg NY 14886 +1 607 330 5711 johnl@iecc.com, Mayor, http://johnlevine.com, Member, Provisional board, Coalition Against Unsolicited Commercial E-mail ------------------------------ Subject: Re: What Exactly Did "Telstar" Do? From: Charles G Gray Date: Tue, 14 Dec 2004 08:09:23 -0600 Telstar I, the first active satellite repeater ("bent pipe") was launched on 10 July 1962 by NASA, in conjunction with AT&T. If you "Google" for "Telstar", and look at the first 5 or 6 entries you can get full details (and some very good photos and diagrams) on the launch and transmission capabilities. Note that it was only 34.5 inches in diameter, and impossible to see from the Earth. Telstar I operated from 10 July 62 to 23 November 62 and 4 January 63 to 21 February 63. Transistor failure due to Van Allen Belt radiation damaged the command subsystem, but it was recovered for the second short round of tests, until it failed completely. Telstar II operated from 7 May 63 to May 65. An earlier satellite, Echo, was launched on 12 August 1960. It was a passive reflector balloon 33 meters in diameter, made of 0.013 cm thick aluminized plastic. It orbited at 1000 miles and could be seen from the Earth. I was living in El Paso, Texas at the time, and if we went out into the desert away from the "ground light" we could see it pass overhead. It was in an almost perfect circular orbit, inclined at 47.3 degrees. Communications were established between Jet Propulsion Laboratories (JPL) in Goldstone, CA and Bell Laboratories at Holmdel, NJ. JPL used a 26 meter parabolic dish antenna with 10 Kw transmit power. Bell Labs used a horn reflector with a 6 x 6 meter aperture. It could support two-way live voice and fax was demonstrated on 22 September 1960. See "Engineering and Science in the Bell System - 1925-1980" for more information. Note that the first transatlantic telephone cable (TAT-1) was not laid until 1956, and it carried only 36 voice channels. No transatlantic television capability existed until Telstar. In the 1960's "time assignment speech interpolation" or TASI was installed on TAT-1 which allowed 48 voice channels over the 36 cable pairs. TAT-2 was laid in 1959 and had 48 cable pairs supporting 72 voice channels. TAT-3 came to service in 1963 with 138 pairs for 276 voice channels. Now we are up to TAT-14, which is a dual reverse protection (self healing) ring, capable of carrying 16 10 Gb/s on four fiber pairs. Regards, Charles G. Gray Senior Lecturer, Telecommunications Oklahoma State University - Tulsa (918)594-8433 ------------------------------ From: J.P. Wing Subject: Re: Strange Wireless Problem Date: Tue, 14 Dec 2004 09:36:01 -0500 Organization: Posted via Supernews, http://www.supernews.com A User wrote in message news:telecom23.596.9@telecom-digest.org: > On Mon, 13 Dec 2004 07:29:11 -0500, Matt B. > wrote: >> Hello all, >> I'm having a strange problem and I hope you can help ... A few >> co-workers are using wireless-enabled laptops. They are able to >> receive e-mail from the POP3 server, but are unable to send. They get >> the error "The server has timed out ... might be server problems, >> etc.." If they plug in to a wired connection, it works fine. >> Everyone is using Outlook 2000 or 2003. It doesn't matter where they >> are using the wireless connection -- at home, at the office, at >> great-grandma Edna's ... it all does the same thing ... and we are at >> a loss! Any suggestions would be greatly appreciated! >> Thanks, >> Matt B. >> e-mail: moc.oohay@02091bttam <--Blocked...reverse it > You need to use the SMTP server of the the ISP you are on, or it will > be blocked. This is normal antispam behaviour. There are some SMTP servers that let users authenticate with username and password, basically granting them access from anywhere. I have a Powerbook and a .Mac subscription and use it all over the place, and I am able to send mail over my .Mac connection no matter where I am. Perhaps MSN/Hotmail offers a similar solution for Windows users. J.P. Wing ------------------------------ Subject: Re: Urban Legends Reference Pages: Politics (Celling Your Soul) From: Mark Atwood Organization: EasyNews, UseNet made Easy! Date: Tue, 14 Dec 2004 07:21:33 GMT Steve Sobol writes: > Tony P. wrote: >> In article , dvanhorn@dvanhorn.org >> says: >>> One thing I've noticed lately, is a lot of telemarketing calls from >>> Quebec. Note that Canadian telemarketers are not bound by US law. >> I've noted the same thing. Is there some particular reason this occurs? > Because they aren't bound by US law ... But the people they are marketing on behalf of *are*, and they are responsable for assuring the legality of all marketing efforts they have subcontracted for. Mark Atwood | When you do things right, people won't be sure mark@atwood.name | you've done anything at all. http://mark.atwood.name/ http://www.livejournal.com/users/fallenpegasus ------------------------------ From: Kenneth P. Stox Organization: Ministry of Silly Walks Subject: Re: 35 billion Sprint-Nextel merger may close this week Date: Tue, 14 Dec 2004 16:07:07 GMT Telecom dailyLead from USTA wrote: > Telecom dailyLead from USTA > December 13, 2004 > http://www.dailylead.com/latestIssue.jsp?i=18081&l=2017006 > TODAY'S HEADLINES > NEWS OF THE DAY > * $35 billion Sprint-Nextel merger may close this week I wouldn't count on it, according to today's WSJ, it appears that Verizon make make a run on Sprint. Could be an interesting time for the telecom market. ------------------------------ From: Rick Merrill Subject: Re: Radar Detectors Organization: Comcast Online Date: Tue, 14 Dec 2004 16:55:57 GMT DevilsPGD wrote: > In message Geoffrey Welsh > wrote: >>> A few years ago on a major road in my city, a system was trialled >>> where computerised signs would advise drivers what speed to travel at >>> to get the "green wave" of traffic lights. >> Shouldn't that be the speed limit?!? > Traffic light timing changes throughout the day (and in some cases, > dynamically based on traffic) -- this is unique, since it effectively > dynamically changes the speed limit (and this limit was not enforced). > For recreational use only. This was tried three decades ago in Woburn MA to synchronize the rt38 on-ramp with the traffic passing by on rt "128". It never worked for me, but the variable speed limit might help. - RM ------------------------------ From: John Bartley Date: Tue, 14 Dec 2004 12:02:37 -0500 Subject: Re: Is 'Transitional Fair Use' The Wave Of The Future? > In article , Monty Solomon > wrote: >> A middle-level executive at Time Warner has approached several cable >> companies and broached the idea of restricting the ability of >> customers who use those company's Digital Video Recorders to record >> several popular Time Warner TV programs. On Mon, 13 Dec 2004, in comp.dcom.telecom Barry Margolin wrote: > Sounds like another good reason to support standalone DVRs, like > ReplayTV and TiVo, rather than cableco-supplied DVR services. Sadly, this is not an adequate solution. Unless you record a program off t o tape, disc or PC media, programs can be deleted through the capabilities of existing, standalone equipment. TiVo and ReplayTV have already demonstrated their ability to change the programming on DVRs without the consent of the user, as has DISH Network. Unless the user hacks the hardware and its current code to prevent it, the DVR manufacturer can slipstream the ability to do exactly what Time Warner wants into a user's DVR. My Dishplayer just had another new feature pushed to it over the weekend, without my consent. I've seen other 'upgrades' pushed to other DVRs, DISH and otherwise, without user consent. I regret that Mr. Margolin's solution is not adequate to protect television programming. ------------------------------ Date: Tue, 14 Dec 2004 12:38:20 -0500 From: T. Sean Weintz Subject: Re: Broadcast fax provider? Organization: DSL.net Hey -- thought some of you here might want to have some fun with this fax spammer -- Notice he has a toll free number. Call him up and let him know what you think of his business! bkokinadis@gmail.com wrote: > If anyone is looking for broadcast fax solutions contact me at > brettkokinadis@openfax.com. We provide world-class service at the cost > of pennies instead of in-house fax solutions! > We focus on Broadcast fax (with or without mail merge), fax on demand, > email and voice broadcasting. > Call us today for a free quote or to learn more about our services. > www.openfax.com > 1-866-OPENFAX (1-866-673-6329) Ext. 1002 > brettkokinadis@openfax.com [TELECOM Digest Editor's Note: I used to publish here a 'business directory' for faxers, spammers, scammers and other vermin which posted an 800 number in their trash. Digest readers were then able to let their fingers do the walking as they inquired about all the fabulous offers being presented on the net. If anyone of you wishes to edit another issue of the Telecom Digest Business Directory please be my guest. Use good editing procedure (as we read recently on the net, a lack of good editing is a major problem around here), which means, in this context run a few thousand spam messages through an editor, grepping out all the lines with toll free numbers in them and a line with information. Put them in a list, one after another, and send that *edited only, please!* list as a message here to the Digest. The guys will know what to do when they read the list. PAT] ------------------------------ From: kludge@panix.com (Scott Dorsey) Subject: Re: Calling Card Needed -- Short Interaction Sequence Date: 14 Dec 2004 13:46:25 -0500 Organization: Former users of Netcom shell (1989-2000) Joseph wrote: > On Sat, 11 Dec 2004 21:35:20 -0700, DevilsPGD > wrote: >>> Then their billing arrangement is broken. The FCC regs are that the >>> pay phone operator gets their kickback of (usually about $0.30 [a]) >>> for _each_ call. If you (typically) hit the " * " button on the keypad >>> to tell your phonecard service to let you make a second call without >>> having to hangup and redial the whole kit and kaboodle, the FCC regs >>> treat that one as, yes, a second call, with an additional $0.30. >> Interesting, do you know what defines when a second call starts? > Why is this such a difficult question? You finish one call and begin > another one. When the second call answers the second call starts. Most of these guys don't have supervision to tell when the second call answers. They cannot tell if the call DOES answer. Most of them wait a predetermined time (thirty seconds is common) and if the call has not terminated, assume it's begin. What if you are calling internationally, and the call set-up time is ten minutes or so? -- scott "C'est un Nagra. C'est suisse, et tres, tres precis." ------------------------------ Date: 14 Dec 2004 08:02:35 -0000 From: John Levine Subject: Re: Cingular Migration Organization: I.E.C.C., Trumansburg NY USA > Cingular and AT&T Wireless are migrated, does it mean they are one > company? Yes, or they will be momentarily. > But how come there are advertisments saying current AT&T Wireless > customers can migrate to Cingular? Because their networks are still separate. They both use the same GSM technology, which means that users of one can roam on the other's network now for free, but it'll take a while to combine the two networks into one. ------------------------------ From: Tony P. Subject: Re: Cingular Migration Organization: ATCC Date: Tue, 14 Dec 2004 07:14:03 -0500 In article , jrefactors@hotmail.com says: > Cingular and AT&T Wireless are migrated, does it mean they are one > company? But how come there are advertisments saying current AT&T > Wireless customers can migrate to Cingular? I am confused, and don't > know how the telecom business works. > Please advise. > Thanks. They might be migrated on the balance sheet, but it will be a hell of a long time before they're migrated WRT billing systems and even wireless systems. ------------------------------ From: Justin Time Subject: Re: Cingular Migration Date: 14 Dec 2004 06:08:17 -0800 Organization: http://groups.google.com jrefact...@hotmail.com wrote on Dec 13, 10:10 am: > Cingular and AT&T Wireless are migrated, does it mean they are one > company? But how come there are advertisments saying current AT&T > Wireless customers can migrate to Cingular? I am confused, and don't > know how the telecom business works. > Please advise. > Thanks. Cingular bought the assets and liabilities of AT&T Wireless as of October 17, 2004. The migration -- or moving -- that is going on is being done in several ways. Customers of ATT Wireless have the option of remaining on their existing cellular plans and equipment or they can migrate -- move -- to Cingular and buy new equipment with new service plans and be subject to new service contracts. The conversion of all ATT customers to Cingular must be complete by March 16, 2005 as the name AT&T Wireless will revert back to AT&T where it has already been announced the brand will then be used to resell service from Sprint. AT&T Wireless will go from being a provider to a reseller of service. For those AT&T customers who do not migrate -- that is change plans, service or commitments -- they will be rolled into the Cingular network with their existing equipment and plans, and in some cases with no commitment contracts. I, for one, am on an old AT&T Regional Business Plan that has an extremely large "home" calling area and no long distance charges for calls originated within my "home" calling area. There is no equivalent plan available in the new Cingular offerings and AT&T stopped offering this particular plan about 2 years ago. As I have been a customer for several years, I also have no service commitments which makes me one of their prime targets for "roll-over" or migration. The cellular business is very cut-throat and the intent of the various companies is to offer a potential customer a wide set of offerings in order to get a commitment to spend a fixed amount with the company for a specific period of time. Often the offers include free or heavily subsidized phones with all the latest gadgets including cameras, "smart phones", so-called free services like cellular to cellular calling and long distance, a limited amount of messaging or other incentives to get a person to sign a contract or renew a contract for a new period. And with the average requested commitment being 2 years with an expected life cycle of a telephone of 18 months, it becomes a cycle designed to trap a consumer into a company or pay a hefty "termination penalty" to get out of their contract early. Rodgers Platt ------------------------------ Subject: Re: Cingular Migration Organization: io.com From: djmcdona@io.com (Daniel J McDonald) Date: Tue, 14 Dec 2004 13:02:09 -0600 In article , wrote: > Cingular and AT&T Wireless are migrated, does it mean they are one > company? Yes, but two networks. ATTWS uses TDMA primarily, with a few pockets of GSM, where Cingular is all GSM-based. > But how come there are advertisments saying current AT&T > Wireless customers can migrate to Cingular? That is, trade in their old TDMA phone for a GSM phone, or even their old attws GSM phone for a Cingular GSM phone ... This is, obstensibly, because Cingular has "many more features" on their phone programming, but really just represents what they want to do with their spectrum. > I am confused, and don't know how the telecom business works. I suspect if you knew how it worked, you would be even more confused ;-) > Please advise. If you live in a rural area, or travel in/through rural areas, stick with your TDMA phone until they pry it from your cold, dead hand. If you are just in big cities, changing won't hurt you, since the coverage for the GSM service is much better in the bigger cities. The goal is, supposedly, to provide GSM coverage everywhere TDMA coverage was over a two year period. But as long as I can get signal in lots of places where my wife's GSM phone is dead, I'm sticking with TDMA. Daniel J McDonald CCIE # 2495, CNX Visit my website: http://www.austinnetworkdesign.com ------------------------------ TELECOM Digest is an electronic journal devoted mostly but not exclusively to telecommunications topics. It is circulated anywhere there is email, in addition to various telecom forums on a variety of networks such as Compuserve and America On Line, Yahoo Groups, and other forums. It is also gatewayed to Usenet where it appears as the moderated newsgroup 'comp.dcom.telecom'. TELECOM Digest is a not-for-profit, mostly non-commercial educational service offered to the Internet by Patrick Townson. All the contents of the Digest are compilation-copyrighted. You may reprint articles in some other media on an occasional basis, but please attribute my work and that of the original author. Contact information: Patrick Townson/TELECOM Digest Post Office Box 50 Independence, KS 67301 Phone: 620-402-0134 Fax 1: 775-255-9970 Fax 2: 530-309-7234 Fax 3: 208-692-5145 Email: editor@telecom-digest.org Subscribe: telecom-subscribe@telecom-digest.org Unsubscribe:telecom-unsubscribe@telecom-digest.org This Digest is the oldest continuing e-journal about telecomm- unications on the Internet, having been founded in August, 1981 and published continuously since then. Our archives are available for your review/research. We believe we are the oldest e-zine/mailing list on the internet in any category! URL information: http://telecom-digest.org Anonymous FTP: mirror.lcs.mit.edu/telecom-archives/archives/ (or use our mirror site: ftp.epix.net/pub/telecom-archives) Email <==> FTP: telecom-archives@telecom-digest.org Send a simple, one line note to that automated address for a help file on how to use the automatic retrieval system for archives files. You can get desired files in email. ************************************************************************* * TELECOM Digest is partially funded by a grant from * * Judith Oppenheimer, President of ICB Inc. and purveyor of accurate * * 800 & Dot Com News, Intelligence, Analysis, and Consulting. * * http://ICBTollFree.com, http://1800TheExpert.com * * Views expressed herein should not be construed as representing * * views of Judith Oppenheimer or ICB Inc. * ************************************************************************* ICB Toll Free News. Contact information is not sold, rented or leased. One click a day feeds a person a meal. Go to http://www.thehungersite.com Copyright 2004 ICB, Inc. and TELECOM Digest. All rights reserved. Our attorney is Bill Levant, of Blue Bell, PA. ************************ DIRECTORY ASSISTANCE JUST 65 CENTS ONE OR TWO INQUIRIES CHARGED TO YOUR CREDIT CARD! REAL TIME, UP TO DATE! SPONSORED BY TELECOM DIGEST AND EASY411.COM SIGN UP AT http://www.easy411.com/telecomdigest ! ************************ --------------------------------------------------------------- Finally, the Digest is funded by gifts from generous readers such as yourself who provide funding in amounts deemed appropriate. Your help is important and appreciated. A suggested donation of fifty dollars per year per reader is considered appropriate. See our address above. Please make at least a single donation to cover the cost of processing your name to the mailing list. All opinions expressed herein are deemed to be those of the author. Any organizations listed are for identification purposes only and messages should not be considered any official expression by the organization. End of TELECOM Digest V23 #597 ****************************** From editor@telecom-digest.org Tue Dec 14 21:48:20 2004 Received: (from ptownson@localhost) by massis.lcs.mit.edu (8.11.6p3/8.11.6) id iBF2mJ206415; Tue, 14 Dec 2004 21:48:20 -0500 (EST) Date: Tue, 14 Dec 2004 21:48:20 -0500 (EST) From: editor@telecom-digest.org Message-Id: <200412150248.iBF2mJ206415@massis.lcs.mit.edu> X-Authentication-Warning: massis.lcs.mit.edu: ptownson set sender to editor@telecom-digest.org using -f To: ptownson Approved: patsnewlist Subject: TELECOM Digest V23 #598 TELECOM Digest Tue, 14 Dec 2004 21:48:00 EST Volume 23 : Issue 598 Inside This Issue: Editor: Patrick A. Townson Software Should Not Be Copyrighted -- Lawsuit (Lisa Minter) Holiday Shoppers Encounter Glitches at Amazon.com (Lisa Minter) Scams Could Alter Holiday Web Shopping - Analysts (Lisa Minter) Google Announces Search Deal with Seven Libraries (Lisa Minter) Re: Airborne Cell-Phone Ban Likely to Remain For Now (AES/newspost) Re: Calling Card Needed -- Short Interaction Sequence (DevilsPGD) Re: Is 'Transitional Fair Use' The Wave Of The Future? (Clark Griswold) Telecom and VOIP (Voice over Internet Protocol) Digest for the Internet. All contents here are copyrighted by Patrick Townson and the individual writers/correspondents. Articles may be used in other journals or newsgroups, provided the writer's name and the Digest are included in the fair use quote. By using -any name or email address- included herein for -any- reason other than responding to an article herein, you agree to pay a hundred dollars to the recipients of the email. =========================== Addresses herein are not to be added to any mailing list, nor to be sold or given away without explicit written consent. Chain letters, viruses, porn, spam, and miscellaneous junk are definitely unwelcome. We must fight spam for the same reason we fight crime: not because we are naive enough to believe that we will ever stamp it out, but because we do not want the kind of world that results when no one stands against crime. Geoffrey Welsh =========================== See the bottom of this issue for subscription and archive details and the name of our lawyer; other stuff of interest. ---------------------------------------------------------------------- From: Lisa Minter Subject: Software Should Not Be Copyrighted -- Lawsuit Date: Tue, 14 Dec 2004 11:01:12 EST By Andy Sullivan WASHINGTON (Reuters) - Computer software should not be protected by copyright laws designed for music, literature and other creative works, according to a lawsuit filed in a U.S. court in San Francisco. Intellectual-property consultant Greg Aharonian hopes to convince the court that software makers can protect their products adequately through patents, which provide more comprehensive protection, but are difficult to obtain and expire in a shorter period of time. The case seeks to clarify which laws the $100 billion U.S. software industry uses to protect its products. Currently, software makers like Microsoft Corp. use both copyright and patent laws to protect their creations, as well as "clickwrap" agreements that stipulate terms of use. An official with a software-industry trade group said not every software product is protected by patents. "If you eliminated the ability to sue somebody for copyright infringement, you would eviscerate our ability to go against pirates," said Emory Simon, counselor for the Business Software Alliance, which estimates that U.S. businesses lost $6.5 billion last year to piracy. Aharonian argues in his complaint that software copyright laws violate the right to due process enshrined in the U.S. Constitution because they do not provide clear boundaries for appropriate use. That means industry players and courts do not have a clear idea of the rules. "Until you're sued and a judge makes up his mind about what is the idea and expression (at stake), no one knows," Aharonian said in an interview. In one well-known case, Lexmark International Inc. invoked copyright laws to prevent a competitor from making computer circuits that allow cheaper inkjet cartridges to work on its printers. One court ruled in Lexmark's favor in 2002, but an appeals court in October overturned that decision and allowed rival Static Control Components to sell its inkjet cartridge parts. Aharonian said in his complaint he does not know if he personally has run afoul of copyright laws because he has set up a database of thousands of computer programs to help software companies figure out if their products infringe on existing material. If the owner of any of those programs decides to sue, he could face hundreds of thousands of dollars in penalties and possible jail time. While patents protect an idea -- say, a way to direct traffic on the Internet -- copyrights only protect the expression of that idea, usually the written code that tells the computer what to do. Inventors applying for a patent have to prove their idea is new and original, a process that typically takes years and costs thousands of dollars. Patents expire after 20 years. Anybody who scribbles a poem on the back of a cocktail napkin, by contrast, is protected by copyright laws for 70 years after their death, or 95 years if the work is owned by a corporation.

Both the U.S. Patent and Trademark Office and the Copyright Office began accepting applications for computer programs in the 1960s. Congress included software in copyright law in 1976. An official with the U.S. Copyright Office declined to comment on the case, but said copyright protection was vital for U.S. software makers. "I think it is fair to say it is the primary means of protecting U.S.-based software," said Kent Dunlap, principal legal advisor to the Copyright Office's general counsel. NOTE: For more telecom/internet/networking/computer news from the daily media, check out our feature 'Telecom Digest Extra' each day at http://telecom-digest.org/td-extra . New articles daily. *** FAIR USE NOTICE. This message contains copyrighted material the use of which has not been specifically authorized by the copyright owner. This Internet discussion group is making it available without profit to group members who have expressed a prior interest in receiving the included information in their efforts to advance the understanding of literary, educational, political, and economic issues, for non-profit research and educational purposes only. I believe that this constitutes a 'fair use' of the copyrighted material as provided for in section 107 of the U.S. Copyright Law. If you wish to use this copyrighted material for purposes of your own that go beyond 'fair use,' you must obtain permission from the copyright owner, in this instance Reuters News Service. For more information go to: http://www.law.cornell.edu/uscode/17/107.shtml ------------------------------ From: Lisa Minter Subject: Holiday Shoppers Encounter Glitches at Amazon.com Date: Tue, 14 Dec 2004 11:03:52 -0500 (EST) NEW YORK (Reuters) - Recent technical glitches have stopped some holiday shoppers from completing purchases at Amazon.com Inc. but the Web retailer's sales are unlikely to be hurt unless the problem persists, analysts said. The biggest problem occurred last week, when the popular Web retailer had an outage that lasted for more than half a day and made its site virtually unavailable to one in five users, according to Keynote Systems Inc. Gomez Inc., which tracks Internet shopping, said it found sporadic outages at Amazon the week after Thanksgiving and last week. Last week, Gomez found it was unable to complete a transaction on Amazon about 12 percent of the time it tried, according to the firm's data. "There have been a number of glitches," said Donna Hoffman, a management professor at Vanderbilt University and co-director of its Sloan Center for Internet Retailing. Amazon is considered "the gold standard in the industry. The concern is that if they're having problems, then what does that mean for the rest of the industry?" she said. Hoffman said, however, that even if Amazon shoppers have encountered technical problems, most of them would be likely to come back to the site and complete their shopping after the glitches are resolved. The site experienced an outage a week ago, Amazon spokesman Craig Berman said. "We have very sophisticated complex systems that have problems from time to time." However, no further problems have come up since then, he said. Berman declined to comment on whether sales were affected by the outage. Stock analyst Martin Pyykkonen, of Janco Partners, said the recent outages have "probably been more than just insignificant" but that he does not see the problem as being a drag on the company's overall sales at this point. "Obviously the whole volume still remains to be seen," he said of the holiday shopping season. Another analyst, David Garrity of Caris & Co., said he is not surprised that Amazon would encounter some "stresses on the system" during the busy holiday shopping season. He said the problems suggest many people are using the Web site. "It indicates very strong demand on the part of consumers," he said. "These are the growing pains of the Internet." Industrywide, online holiday spending so far this season is on track to meet estimates, according to comScore Networks, an Internet research firm. The Internet retail tracker said last week that holiday shopping on the Web, excluding travel and auctions, totaled $8.41 billion between Nov. 1 and Dec. 5, up 23 percent from a year ago. Amazon Chief Executive Jeff Bezos has said that the online retailer is poised for record holiday sales, with MP3 players and digital cameras leading the way as this year's hot gift items. Amazon shares rose 78 cents, or 2 percent, to close at $39.83 on Nasdaq. NOTE: For more telecom/internet/networking/computer news from the daily media, check out our feature 'Telecom Digest Extra' each day at http://telecom-digest.org/td-extra . New articles daily. *** FAIR USE NOTICE. This message contains copyrighted material the use of which has not been specifically authorized by the copyright owner. This Internet discussion group is making it available without profit to group members who have expressed a prior interest in receiving the included information in their efforts to advance the understanding of literary, educational, political, and economic issues, for non-profit research and educational purposes only. I believe that this constitutes a 'fair use' of the copyrighted material as provided for in section 107 of the U.S. Copyright Law. If you wish to use this copyrighted material for purposes of your own that go beyond 'fair use,' you must obtain permission from the copyright owner. For more information go to: http://www.law.cornell.edu/uscode/17/107.shtml ------------------------------ From: Lisa Minter Subject: Scams Could Alter Holiday Web Shopping - Analysts Date: Tue, 14 Dec 2004 11:06:36 PST SAN FRANCISCO (Reuters) - While holiday shoppers are purchasing more presents on the Internet, fears of identity theft and online fraud are making them more careful about using the Web, analysts said on Monday. Online scammers are getting more sophisticated and aggressive, and "It's starting to affect (consumer) behavior," said Jonathan Penn, an analyst at technology research company Forrester. "People are less willing to give out information. "We are seeing a lot of them curb their behavior and scale back purchases of good and services online," said Penn. Some consumers are rejecting obscure sites with rock-bottom prices and sticking with more established Web retailers they have used before, he said, adding that the impact on online retailing is difficult to measure. In one survey, conducted by a unit of market research group TNS for anti-fraud services company MarkMonitor, 10 percent of respondents said fears of online fraud would lead them to do less online holiday shopping than they had planned. Nearly 25 percent of the 1,015 adults polled said they had no plans to shop online this season. The findings follow a survey of 1,071 people released in November by TNS and online privacy watchdog TRUSTe, which showed that almost 6 in 10 consumers -- about 49 percent more than in 2003 -- said they planned to cut their online shopping because of identity theft and other privacy concerns. Phishing attacks -- spam e-mails that attempt to lure people to spoof Web sites that ask for personal or financial information that could be used to drain bank balances or fraudulently open credit card accounts -- are on the rise. Phishers, who in the last year had posed almost exclusively as financial services companies such as Citibank or PayPal, have begun tailoring their attacks to the holiday season. In recent incidents, phishers have pretended to be companies looking to confirm online purchases or to verify shipping information, with the aim of hitting people where they are susceptible. "Our sense is that the bank kind of phishing is really the tip of the iceberg," said Mark Shull, president and chief executive of MarkMonitor, also a Web domain registrar. While sellers of counterfeit or gray-market goods -- from luxury items to prescription drugs -- fall into a different category than phishers, they may use credit card information to steal money from unwitting buyers or sell that information to groups that pass it on to underground crime networks, analysts said. Nevertheless, Shull said the MarkMonitor survey showed that some consumers willingly do business with them anyway. To that end, almost 28 percent of respondents said they would throw caution to the wind and knowingly buy a low-priced, good fake of a popular item on the Web for their own use. NOTE: For more telecom/internet/networking/computer news from the daily media, check out our feature 'Telecom Digest Extra' each day at http://telecom-digest.org/td-extra . New articles daily. *** FAIR USE NOTICE. This message contains copyrighted material the use of which has not been specifically authorized by the copyright owner. This Internet discussion group is making it available without profit to group members who have expressed a prior interest in receiving the included information in their efforts to advance the understanding of literary, educational, political, and economic issues, for non-profit research and educational purposes only. I believe that this constitutes a 'fair use' of the copyrighted material as provided for in section 107 of the U.S. Copyright Law. If you wish to use this copyrighted material for purposes of your own that go beyond 'fair use,' you must obtain permission from the copyright owner, in this instance, Reuters News Service. For more information go to: http://www.law.cornell.edu/uscode/17/107.shtml ------------------------------ From: Lisa Minter Subject: Google Announces Search Deal with Seven Libraries Date: Tue, 14 Dec 2004 11:08:24 EST SAN FRANCISCO (Reuters) - Web search leader Google Inc. said late on Monday it is working on a project to digitally scan the collections at seven libraries and will make the pages available to Google users over the coming years. oogle, which is putting up a sample of the new information on Tuesday, said it will help scan the entire collections of such partners as the University of Michigan. It also is undertaking pilot programs at places like Harvard University and the New York Public Library. "The goal of the project is to unlock the wealth of information that is offline and bring it online," said Susan Wojcicki, director of product management at Google. When search results yield pages from scanned library books, Google will provide links to search and advertising partner Amazon.com and to libraries where the books can be borrowed. Google will get no compensation for the links. Google is not immediately serving ads on library material, Wojcicki said. The move comes as other search companies like Yahoo Inc. and Microsoft's MSN Internet unit and privately held Grokker also are working to expand their reach beyond just the Web to encyclopedias, library collections and other sources. NOTE: For more telecom/internet/networking/computer news from the daily media, check out our feature 'Telecom Digest Extra' each day at http://telecom-digest.org/td-extra . New articles daily. *** FAIR USE NOTICE. This message contains copyrighted material the use of which has not been specifically authorized by the copyright owner. This Internet discussion group is making it available without profit to group members who have expressed a prior interest in receiving the included information in their efforts to advance the understanding of literary, educational, political, and economic issues, for non-profit research and educational purposes only. I believe that this constitutes a 'fair use' of the copyrighted material as provided for in section 107 of the U.S. Copyright Law. If you wish to use this copyrighted material for purposes of your own that go beyond 'fair use,' you must obtain permission from the copyright owner, in this instance Reuters News Service. For more information go to: http://www.law.cornell.edu/uscode/17/107.shtml ------------------------------ From: AES/newspost Subject: Re: USATODAY.com - Airborne Cell-Phone Ban Likely to Remain For Now Date: Tue, 14 Dec 2004 12:05:25 -0800 In article , Marcus Didius Falco wrote: > Airlines, rival wireless companies and aircraft maker Boeing are > salivating at the prospect of more in-flight communications services, > including high-speed Internet, or broadband, to meet travelers' > demands. > "Today the high cost of wireless when flying has kept the users low," > telecommunications analyst Jeff Kagan said. "But once the cost drops > or once you can use your own phone on board, the quiet air cabin may > be a thing of the past." > Kagan, who does a lot of traveling, said he loves and hates the idea > of making and receiving calls during a flight. > "We should be very careful before opening this up," he said. "Just > think how annoying it is to hear the person behind you shouting to his > neighbor when you are trying to work or read or sleep." I've read news stories in the past about cellphone jammers or blockers for use in restaurants, theaters, library reading rooms, etc. Anyone have any leads on portable, battery-powered versions? ------------------------------ From: DevilsPGD Subject: Re: Calling Card Needed -- Short Interaction Sequence Date: Tue, 14 Dec 2004 15:10:23 -0700 Organization: Octanews In message Clark W. Griswold, Jr. wrote: >> When the second call answers the second call starts. > And the more technical response would be "when the call supervises". Sure, but from the payphone's point of view, that happens once: When you dial the calling card access number. Anything after that is still considered one call from the payphone's point of view. ------------------------------ From: Clark W. Griswold, Jr. Subject: Re: Is 'Transitional Fair Use' The Wave Of The Future? Date: Tue, 14 Dec 2004 16:20:34 -0700 Organization: Posted via Supernews, http://www.supernews.com John Bartley wrote: > My Dishplayer just had another new feature pushed to it over the > weekend, without my consent. Dishplayer or one of the newer DVRs? What was the feature? ------------------------------ TELECOM Digest is an electronic journal devoted mostly but not exclusively to telecommunications topics. It is circulated anywhere there is email, in addition to various telecom forums on a variety of networks such as Compuserve and America On Line, Yahoo Groups, and other forums. It is also gatewayed to Usenet where it appears as the moderated newsgroup 'comp.dcom.telecom'. TELECOM Digest is a not-for-profit, mostly non-commercial educational service offered to the Internet by Patrick Townson. All the contents of the Digest are compilation-copyrighted. You may reprint articles in some other media on an occasional basis, but please attribute my work and that of the original author. Contact information: Patrick Townson/TELECOM Digest Post Office Box 50 Independence, KS 67301 Phone: 620-402-0134 Fax 1: 775-255-9970 Fax 2: 530-309-7234 Fax 3: 208-692-5145 Email: editor@telecom-digest.org Subscribe: telecom-subscribe@telecom-digest.org Unsubscribe:telecom-unsubscribe@telecom-digest.org This Digest is the oldest continuing e-journal about telecomm- unications on the Internet, having been founded in August, 1981 and published continuously since then. Our archives are available for your review/research. We believe we are the oldest e-zine/mailing list on the internet in any category! URL information: http://telecom-digest.org Anonymous FTP: mirror.lcs.mit.edu/telecom-archives/archives/ (or use our mirror site: ftp.epix.net/pub/telecom-archives) Email <==> FTP: telecom-archives@telecom-digest.org Send a simple, one line note to that automated address for a help file on how to use the automatic retrieval system for archives files. You can get desired files in email. ************************************************************************* * TELECOM Digest is partially funded by a grant from * * Judith Oppenheimer, President of ICB Inc. and purveyor of accurate * * 800 & Dot Com News, Intelligence, Analysis, and Consulting. * * http://ICBTollFree.com, http://1800TheExpert.com * * Views expressed herein should not be construed as representing * * views of Judith Oppenheimer or ICB Inc. * ************************************************************************* ICB Toll Free News. Contact information is not sold, rented or leased. One click a day feeds a person a meal. Go to http://www.thehungersite.com Copyright 2004 ICB, Inc. and TELECOM Digest. All rights reserved. Our attorney is Bill Levant, of Blue Bell, PA. ************************ DIRECTORY ASSISTANCE JUST 65 CENTS ONE OR TWO INQUIRIES CHARGED TO YOUR CREDIT CARD! REAL TIME, UP TO DATE! SPONSORED BY TELECOM DIGEST AND EASY411.COM SIGN UP AT http://www.easy411.com/telecomdigest ! ************************ --------------------------------------------------------------- Finally, the Digest is funded by gifts from generous readers such as yourself who provide funding in amounts deemed appropriate. Your help is important and appreciated. A suggested donation of fifty dollars per year per reader is considered appropriate. See our address above. Please make at least a single donation to cover the cost of processing your name to the mailing list. All opinions expressed herein are deemed to be those of the author. Any organizations listed are for identification purposes only and messages should not be considered any official expression by the organization. End of TELECOM Digest V23 #598 ****************************** From editor@telecom-digest.org Wed Dec 15 03:08:13 2004 Received: (from ptownson@localhost) by massis.lcs.mit.edu (8.11.6p3/8.11.6) id iBF88D509373; Wed, 15 Dec 2004 03:08:13 -0500 (EST) Date: Wed, 15 Dec 2004 03:08:13 -0500 (EST) From: editor@telecom-digest.org Message-Id: <200412150808.iBF88D509373@massis.lcs.mit.edu> X-Authentication-Warning: massis.lcs.mit.edu: ptownson set sender to editor@telecom-digest.org using -f To: ptownson Approved: patsnewlist Subject: TELECOM Digest V23 #599 TELECOM Digest Wed, 15 Dec 2004 03:08:00 EST Volume 23 : Issue 599 Inside This Issue: Editor: Patrick A. Townson Banks Warned Against On-Line Fraud Dangers (Lisa Minter) Re: Will the Sprint/Nextel Merger Bring the End of Motorola? (Joseph) Re: Calling Card Needed -- Short Interaction Sequence (Joseph) AT&T Prepaid Penalizes Older Customers? (Jesse) Re: Airborne Cell-Phone Ban Likely to Remain For Now (Clark W. Griswold) Re: Airborne Cell-Phone Ban Likely to Remain (Marcus Didius Falco) Re: Airborne Cell-Phone Ban Likely to Remain For Now (Steve Sobol) Re: Is 'Transitional Fair Use' The Wave Of The Future? (Barry Margolin) Re: What Exactly Did "Telstar" Do? (AES/newspost) Re: What Exactly Did "Telstar" Do? (Howard Eisenhauer) Re: Software Should Not Be Copyrighted -- Lawsuit (Steve Sobol) Telecom and VOIP (Voice over Internet Protocol) Digest for the Internet. All contents here are copyrighted by Patrick Townson and the individual writers/correspondents. Articles may be used in other journals or newsgroups, provided the writer's name and the Digest are included in the fair use quote. By using -any name or email address- included herein for -any- reason other than responding to an article herein, you agree to pay a hundred dollars to the recipients of the email. =========================== Addresses herein are not to be added to any mailing list, nor to be sold or given away without explicit written consent. Chain letters, viruses, porn, spam, and miscellaneous junk are definitely unwelcome. We must fight spam for the same reason we fight crime: not because we are naive enough to believe that we will ever stamp it out, but because we do not want the kind of world that results when no one stands against crime. Geoffrey Welsh =========================== See the bottom of this issue for subscription and archive details and the name of our lawyer; other stuff of interest. ---------------------------------------------------------------------- From: Lisa Minter Subject: Banks Warned Against On-Line Fraud Dangers Date: Wed, 15 Dec 2004 01:49:53 EST By Mark Felsenthal WASHINGTON (Reuters) - U.S. banks should use more than a single password to identify on-line customers to prevent fraud, bank regulators said on Tuesday in recommendations that underscore growing concern about theft over the Internet. "Financial institutions' wider adoption of electronic payment systems, as well as the increasing number of customers using these services, have produced greater opportunities for electronic fraud," the Federal Deposit Insurance Corp. said in a study, "Putting an End to Account-Hijacking Identity Theft." The unauthorized use of personal information to break into bank accounts, which regulators refer to as account hijacking, is one of the fastest growing forms of electronic fraud, regulators said. Almost 2 million Internet users experienced fraud of this type in the 12 months ending in April 2004, the agency said. Fraud perpetrators get bank customers' personal information by cracking computer codes, stealing documents, looking over people's shoulders, or getting bank employees to provide the data, the regulator said. Thieves also trick customers into providing personal data by posing as an official source -- a practice known as "phishing." Internet companies, including EarthLink Inc., Microsoft Corp. and America Online Inc. and law-enforcement agencies said last week they will work together to track down online scam artists who pretend to be banks and other legitimate businesses in "phishing" attacks. Regulatory agency FDIC said banks should rely on multiple tests to identify an on-line customer. "The main problem with single-factor identification is that passwords, the most commonly used factor, are often easy to steal, guess, or crack and, once a password is compromised, the thief has the same access rights as the legitimate user," the agency said. Institutions should also invest in software that scans Web sites for indications banks or their customers are the targets of information thieves, the agency said. NOTE: For more telecom/internet/networking/computer news from the daily media, check out our feature 'Telecom Digest Extra' each day at http://telecom-digest.org/td-extra . New articles daily. *** FAIR USE NOTICE. This message contains copyrighted material the use of which has not been specifically authorized by the copyright owner. This Internet discussion group is making it available without profit to group members who have expressed a prior interest in receiving the included information in their efforts to advance the understanding of literary, educational, political, and economic issues, for non-profit research and educational purposes only. I believe that this constitutes a 'fair use' of the copyrighted material as provided for in section 107 of the U.S. Copyright Law. If you wish to use this copyrighted material for purposes of your own that go beyond 'fair use,' you must obtain permission from the copyright owner, in this instance Reuters News Service. For more information go to: http://www.law.cornell.edu/uscode/17/107.shtml ------------------------------ From: Joseph Subject: Re: Will the Sprint/Nextel Merger Bring the End of Motorola? Date: Tue, 14 Dec 2004 23:04:50 -0800 Reply-To: JoeOfSeattle@yahoo.com On Tue, 14 Dec 2004 07:02:43 -0500, John Stahl wrote: > Just like the phrase often heard: "The check's in the mail." The oft > used of late in most every merger and/or acquisition, phrase has been: > "This acquisition or merger will have absolutely no effect on operations." > This phrase has been shown to be, in almost every case, untrue as the > reports all indicate! Well, considering that iDen phones which is what Nextel/Mike uses is only a fraction of the phones that Motorola manufactures and that they manufacture for TDMA, GSM and CDMA technologies as well I think your "sky is falling" scenario is a little premature. Even now Motorola is or was the second largest handset manufacturer in the world. > As a side note, one might also wonder as with the recent announcement > from Cingular that quite a large number of (redundant?) AT&T Wireless > workers will be let go, how many Nextel workers will be getting pink > slips from Sprint? And why do you assume that all the "pink slips" will land at Nextel? Some Sprint folks may find their positions redundant also. ------------------------------ From: Joseph Subject: Re: Calling Card Needed -- Short Interaction Sequence Date: Tue, 14 Dec 2004 23:07:26 -0800 Reply-To: JoeOfSeattle@yahoo.com On 14 Dec 2004 13:46:25 -0500, kludge@panix.com (Scott Dorsey) wrote: > Most of these guys don't have supervision to tell when the second call > answers. They cannot tell if the call DOES answer. Most of them wait > a predetermined time (thirty seconds is common) and if the call has > not terminated, assume it's begin. Why do you assume that "most of these guys don't have supervision?" AFAIK most of the LD operators have answer supervision these days. ------------------------------ From: Jesse Subject: AT&T Prepaid Penalizes Older Customers? Date: 14 Dec 2004 21:18:02 -0800 Organization: http://groups.google.com http://www.attwireless.com/personal/free2go/rates.html It seems that AT&T prepaid wireless has two per-minute-charges for local calls. New customers are charged $0.25 a minute, and customers who activated BEFORE 3/31/04 are charged $0.50 a minute. What's the reasoning behind this? Why would they charge older customer more? It seems this change took place before the merge with Cingular, and from looking over my records, it seems my accumulated minutes started being drained at around that time (3/31/04 -- my rate before the change was $0.30 a minute, IICR). This doesn't seem kosher, and I think I'll contact the Better Business Bureau if I can't get my rates switched. ------------------------------ From: Clark W. Griswold, Jr. Subject: Re: USATODAY.com - Airborne Cell-Phone Ban Likely to Remain For Now Date: Tue, 14 Dec 2004 21:03:46 -0700 Organization: Posted via Supernews, http://www.supernews.com AES/newspost wrote: > I've read news stories in the past about cellphone jammers or blockers > for use in restaurants, theaters, library reading rooms, etc. > Anyone have any leads on portable, battery-powered versions? I share your implied problem with inconsiderate cell users. However, based on your address, you should know that these devices are illegal in the US. While the odds of getting caught using them are quite small, especially if used in a mobile situation (ie, in your pocket), people have been prosecuted in other countries (a dealer in Scotland & a church in Mexico). There are reports of low power devices that emulate a cell base station, but do not connect to any network. These devices in effect fool the phone into staying quiet as they do not pass calls in or out. While the legality of these from a tranmission power point is possibly in a gray area, I'm sure the FCC could come up with charges based on interference with a licensed service. The civil consequences would also be considerable should someone decide to argue that the device interfered with a health or safety critical call. That said, a Google search on "cell jammer" will identify a large number of companies selling such devices. ------------------------------ Date: Wed, 15 Dec 2004 00:50:39 -0500 From: Marcus Didius Falco Subject: Re: USATODAY.com - Airborne Cell-Phone Ban Likely to Remain AES/newspost wrote regarding Re: USATODAY.com Airborne Cell-Phone Ban Likely to Remain For Now on Tue, 14 Dec 2004 12:05:25 -0800: > In article , Marcus Didius Falco > wrote: >> Airlines, rival wireless companies and aircraft maker Boeing are >> salivating at the prospect of more in-flight communications services, >> including high-speed Internet, or broadband, to meet travelers' >> demands. >> "Today the high cost of wireless when flying has kept the users low," >> telecommunications analyst Jeff Kagan said. "But once the cost drops >> or once you can use your own phone on board, the quiet air cabin may >> be a thing of the past." >> Kagan, who does a lot of traveling, said he loves and hates the idea >> of making and receiving calls during a flight. >> "We should be very careful before opening this up," he said. "Just >> think how annoying it is to hear the person behind you shouting to his >> neighbor when you are trying to work or read or sleep." > I've read news stories in the past about cellphone jammers or blockers > for use in restaurants, theaters, library reading rooms, etc. > Anyone have any leads on portable, battery-powered versions? Illegal in the US and Canada. There will probably be MAJOR penalties for using such high-powered devices on aircraft. There are reports that some hotels have been importing them from countries where they are legal (such as Israel and Taiwan), which is possibly why you may have trouble using your cell phone in some hotels. These tend to be hotels that have high charges for using the land-line phones in their rooms. However, no one has proved this, and there are no reports of anyone using a signal-strength meter to scan the hotels in question. ------------------------------ From: Steve Sobol Subject: Re: USATODAY.com - Airborne Cell-Phone Ban Likely to Remain For Now Date: Tue, 14 Dec 2004 22:09:02 -0800 Organization: Glorb Internet Services, http://www.glorb.com AES/newspost wrote: > I've read news stories in the past about cellphone jammers or blockers > for use in restaurants, theaters, library reading rooms, etc. > Anyone have any leads on portable, battery-powered versions? Sure, but I'm not giving them to you. Cellphone jammers are illegal in the US. JustThe.net Internet & New Media Services, http://JustThe.net/ Steven J. Sobol, Geek In Charge / 888.480.4NET (4638) / sjsobol@JustThe.net PGP Key available from your friendly local key server (0xE3AE35ED) Apple Valley, California Nothing scares me anymore. I have three kids. ------------------------------ From: Barry Margolin Subject: Re: Is 'Transitional Fair Use' The Wave Of The Future? Organization: Symantec Date: Wed, 15 Dec 2004 00:42:54 -0500 In article , John Bartley wrote: >> In article , Monty Solomon >> wrote: >>> A middle-level executive at Time Warner has approached several cable >>> companies and broached the idea of restricting the ability of >>> customers who use those company's Digital Video Recorders to record >>> several popular Time Warner TV programs. > On Mon, 13 Dec 2004, in comp.dcom.telecom Barry Margolin > wrote: >> Sounds like another good reason to support standalone DVRs, like >> ReplayTV and TiVo, rather than cableco-supplied DVR services. > Sadly, this is not an adequate solution. Unless you record a program > off t o tape, disc or PC media, programs can be deleted through the > capabilities of existing, standalone equipment. > TiVo and ReplayTV have already demonstrated their ability to change > the programming on DVRs without the consent of the user, as has DISH > Network. Unless the user hacks the hardware and its current code to > prevent it, the DVR manufacturer can slipstream the ability to do > exactly what Time Warner wants into a user's DVR. Sure, they *can* reprogram our systems. But I think these vendors that are independent of the content providers and distributors are less likely to do so. Yes, I know they've made some concessions to content providers (ReplayTV removed Internet Video Sharing and Commercial Advance from their newest DVR models, although they didn't reprogram the older models that already had these features, and hackers discovered how to add them back to the new models). But I think they would be shooting themselves in the feet if they disabled some of the basic functionality of the devices. Barry Margolin, barmar@alum.mit.edu Arlington, MA *** PLEASE post questions in newsgroups, not directly to me *** ------------------------------ From: AES/newspost Subject: Re: What Exactly Did "Telstar" Do? Date: Tue, 14 Dec 2004 18:56:22 -0800 In article , Charles G Gray wrote: > Communications were established between Jet Propulsion Laboratories > (JPL) in Goldstone, CA and Bell Laboratories at Holmdel, NJ. JPL > used a 26 meter parabolic dish antenna with 10 Kw transmit > power. Bell Labs used a horn reflector with a 6 x 6 meter aperture. The excruciating careful calibrations of receiver noise temperature which Bell Labs carried on this antenna and the attached microwave solid-state maser preamplifier revealed that the system had about 3 degrees K of unexplained system noise or equivalent input noise temperature coming into the antenna, out of a total system input noise temperature of about 20 K when looking at the zenith. Penzias and Wilson won the Nobel Prize in Physics a few years later for using the Holmdel horn antenna and receiver to show that this noise, which appeared to come from everywhere in the sky as a uniform radiation bath, represented the isotropic 3 K background radiation left over from the original "Big Bang" creation of the universe. ------------------------------ From: Howard Eisenhauer Subject: Re: What Exactly Did "Telstar" Do? Date: Wed, 15 Dec 2004 03:32:53 GMT Back when I was in school we toured an early commercial ground station, 90' something dish inside a dome. I should have known better but as we walked through the airlock I looked up & saw a bunch of steel roof rafters, then a moments vertigo as I noticed they were curved, then- Holy S___! THAT THINGS BIG!! It was designed before geosync was a reality, so it originaly had the capability to track the Telstar birds as they came over the horizon. I'm not sure why but once it was pointed at one of the Intelsats(?) the operator clamped some locks on the track and/or ring gear to keep it locked in place. Too bad, I would have loved to see it moveing :(. Howard On 13 Dec 2004 11:12:28 -0800, hancock4@bbs.cpcn.com wrote: > In the 1960s, the Bell System launche d a pioneer communications > satellite known as Telstar. The event had great fanfare. People > would be told when and where to look for the tiny dot of light passing > in the night sky, and go out to see it. Models of it appeared in > museums. > While there are generalities written about it, I was curious about > some day to day technical details. > I am curious as to what exactly did Telstar do, once they got it up > and running. That is, did it handle domestic voice long distance > calls? Overseas calls? Telegraph/ data signals? Television > programs, either domestic or overseas? Did it have an orbit fixed > above one point of the earth or its own moving orbit? > How was Telstar controlled? That is, I presume any call handled via > Telstar could also be handled by more conventional means, and backup > was necessary in case Telstar wasn't working for some reason. Did > engineers manually route transmissions and babysit them? > Was Telstar a production unit, expected to be a workaday medium, or > just an experiment to see how satellite communications would work? > (During overseas calls of the 1930s, engineers did have to monitor > every call in progress and adjust frequencies and even bands > (shortwave or longwave) to compensate for atmospheric conditions > affecting the radio. There were advantages and disadvantages for both > shortwave and longwave and both were used. I don't think these were > ever resolved until undersea cables came into use.) > How long did Telstar stay in service? I recall a Telstar II replacing > it, but then the mystiq of satellites waned. Thanks. > [public replies please] ------------------------------ From: Steve Sobol Subject: Re: Software Should Not Be Copyrighted -- Lawsuit Date: Tue, 14 Dec 2004 21:39:49 -0800 Organization: Glorb Internet Services, http://www.glorb.com Lisa Minter wrote: > By Andy Sullivan > WASHINGTON (Reuters) - > Computer software should not be protected by copyright laws designed > for music, literature and other creative works, according to a lawsuit > filed in a U.S. court in San Francisco. > Intellectual-property consultant Greg Aharonian hopes to convince the > court that software makers can protect their products adequately > through patents No. Patents are absolutely NOT the proper way to go. Copyrights are. JustThe.net Internet & New Media Services, http://JustThe.net/ Steven J. Sobol, Geek In Charge / 888.480.4NET (4638) / sjsobol@JustThe.net PGP Key available from your friendly local key server (0xE3AE35ED) Apple Valley, California Nothing scares me anymore. I have three kids. ------------------------------ TELECOM Digest is an electronic journal devoted mostly but not exclusively to telecommunications topics. It is circulated anywhere there is email, in addition to various telecom forums on a variety of networks such as Compuserve and America On Line, Yahoo Groups, and other forums. It is also gatewayed to Usenet where it appears as the moderated newsgroup 'comp.dcom.telecom'. TELECOM Digest is a not-for-profit, mostly non-commercial educational service offered to the Internet by Patrick Townson. All the contents of the Digest are compilation-copyrighted. You may reprint articles in some other media on an occasional basis, but please attribute my work and that of the original author. Contact information: Patrick Townson/TELECOM Digest Post Office Box 50 Independence, KS 67301 Phone: 620-402-0134 Fax 1: 775-255-9970 Fax 2: 530-309-7234 Fax 3: 208-692-5145 Email: editor@telecom-digest.org Subscribe: telecom-subscribe@telecom-digest.org Unsubscribe:telecom-unsubscribe@telecom-digest.org This Digest is the oldest continuing e-journal about telecomm- unications on the Internet, having been founded in August, 1981 and published continuously since then. Our archives are available for your review/research. We believe we are the oldest e-zine/mailing list on the internet in any category! URL information: http://telecom-digest.org Anonymous FTP: mirror.lcs.mit.edu/telecom-archives/archives/ (or use our mirror site: ftp.epix.net/pub/telecom-archives) Email <==> FTP: telecom-archives@telecom-digest.org Send a simple, one line note to that automated address for a help file on how to use the automatic retrieval system for archives files. You can get desired files in email. ************************************************************************* * TELECOM Digest is partially funded by a grant from * * Judith Oppenheimer, President of ICB Inc. and purveyor of accurate * * 800 & Dot Com News, Intelligence, Analysis, and Consulting. * * http://ICBTollFree.com, http://1800TheExpert.com * * Views expressed herein should not be construed as representing * * views of Judith Oppenheimer or ICB Inc. * ************************************************************************* ICB Toll Free News. Contact information is not sold, rented or leased. One click a day feeds a person a meal. Go to http://www.thehungersite.com Copyright 2004 ICB, Inc. and TELECOM Digest. All rights reserved. Our attorney is Bill Levant, of Blue Bell, PA. ************************ DIRECTORY ASSISTANCE JUST 65 CENTS ONE OR TWO INQUIRIES CHARGED TO YOUR CREDIT CARD! REAL TIME, UP TO DATE! SPONSORED BY TELECOM DIGEST AND EASY411.COM SIGN UP AT http://www.easy411.com/telecomdigest ! ************************ --------------------------------------------------------------- Finally, the Digest is funded by gifts from generous readers such as yourself who provide funding in amounts deemed appropriate. Your help is important and appreciated. A suggested donation of fifty dollars per year per reader is considered appropriate. See our address above. Please make at least a single donation to cover the cost of processing your name to the mailing list. All opinions expressed herein are deemed to be those of the author. Any organizations listed are for identification purposes only and messages should not be considered any official expression by the organization. End of TELECOM Digest V23 #599 ****************************** From editor@telecom-digest.org Wed Dec 15 14:20:01 2004 Received: (from ptownson@localhost) by massis.lcs.mit.edu (8.11.6p3/8.11.6) id iBFJK1V16136; Wed, 15 Dec 2004 14:20:01 -0500 (EST) Date: Wed, 15 Dec 2004 14:20:01 -0500 (EST) From: editor@telecom-digest.org Message-Id: <200412151920.iBFJK1V16136@massis.lcs.mit.edu> X-Authentication-Warning: massis.lcs.mit.edu: ptownson set sender to editor@telecom-digest.org using -f To: ptownson Approved: patsnewlist Subject: TELECOM Digest V23 #600 TELECOM Digest Wed, 15 Dec 2004 14:20:00 EST Volume 23 : Issue 600 Inside This Issue: Editor: Patrick A. Townson Sprint Acquires Nextel in $35 Billion Deal (Lisa Minter) FCC to Vote on Wireless Access on Planes (Lisa Minter) Cross Battery and Verizon (Joe Perkowski) Sprint, Nextel Directors Approve Merger Plan (Telecom dailyLead) Sprint Nextel, No. 3 With A Bullet (Eric Friedebach) Alltel, Cingular, AT&T Wireless (Wesrock@aol.com) AT&T CallVantage Service -- Your Thoughts (Lanceman) Re: Is 'Transitional Fair Use' The Wave Of The Future? (John Bartley) Re: Strange Wireless Problem (William Warren) Telecom and VOIP (Voice over Internet Protocol) Digest for the Internet. All contents here are copyrighted by Patrick Townson and the individual writers/correspondents. Articles may be used in other journals or newsgroups, provided the writer's name and the Digest are included in the fair use quote. By using -any name or email address- included herein for -any- reason other than responding to an article herein, you agree to pay a hundred dollars to the recipients of the email. =========================== Addresses herein are not to be added to any mailing list, nor to be sold or given away without explicit written consent. Chain letters, viruses, porn, spam, and miscellaneous junk are definitely unwelcome. We must fight spam for the same reason we fight crime: not because we are naive enough to believe that we will ever stamp it out, but because we do not want the kind of world that results when no one stands against crime. Geoffrey Welsh =========================== See the bottom of this issue for subscription and archive details and the name of our lawyer; other stuff of interest. ---------------------------------------------------------------------- From: Lisa Minter Subject: Sprint Acquires Nextel in $35 Billion Deal Date: Wed, 15 Dec 2004 09:52:32 EST NEW YORK - Telecommunications giant Sprint Corp. is acquiring Nextel Communications Inc. in a $35 billion deal that would create the nation's third largest wireless telephone service provider. The widely rumored transaction, announced Wednesday, would create a company called Sprint Nextel with about $40 billion in combined yearly revenue and more than 35 million wireless subscribers, trailing only Cingular Wireless and Verizon Wireless. Sprint would get access to Nextel's 15.3 million subscribers, many of whom are business customers, and Nextel would avoid a costly upgrade of its own network. The companies estimated the merger would save them $12 billion in operating costs and network upgrades. The combination comes as the cost of wireless calls continue to drop and the industry begins to look like the long-distance business looked five years ago: Three big competitors constantly undercutting each other's prices. After completion of the deal, which the companies described as a merger of equals, Sprint's local telecommunications business would be spun off to the combined firm's shareholders. The local telecom business accounted for about $6 billion of their combined revenues. Sprint chairman and chief executive Gary D. Forsee will become president and CEO of Sprint Nextel, and Timothy M. Donahue, currently president and CEO of Nextel, will become chairman of the new company. The new company's board would consist of 12 members with six from each company. "This merger positions Sprint Nextel for greater success than either company could have achieved alone," Forsee said in a statement. Sprint currently ranks as the nation's third biggest wireless company as well as the third largest in long-distance service. Nextel ranks fifth in U.S. wireless service. Nextel agreed last month to move its network to a more expensive band of broadcast spectrum because of fears of interference between its phones and emergency response radios. Now, according to a press release from the companies, Sprint's next-generation technology will be used for the combined network. After the takeover, the three largest wireless companies will carry about 75 percent of traffic, according to telecom analyst Jeff Kagan. At the top is Cingular Wireless, a joint venture between BellSouth Corp. and SBC Communications Inc. that recently completed the $41 billion acquisition of AT&T Wireless. No. 2 Verizon Wireless is a joint venture owned by Verizon Communications Inc. and Vodafone Group PLC, the world's largest mobile-phone operator. Under terms of the deal, Sprint shareholders would get one share of the new company for each Sprint share while Nextel shareholders would get the equivalent of 1.3 Sprint Nextel shares for each of their shares. At today's rates, each Nextel share would be exchanged for 1.28 Sprint Nextel shares and 50 cents in cash. NOTE: For more telecom/internet/networking/computer news from the daily media, check out our feature 'Telecom Digest Extra' each day at http://telecom-digest.org/td-extra . New articles daily. *** FAIR USE NOTICE. This message contains copyrighted material the use of which has not been specifically authorized by the copyright owner. This Internet discussion group is making it available without profit to group members who have expressed a prior interest in receiving the included information in their efforts to advance the understanding of literary, educational, political, and economic issues, for non-profit research and educational purposes only. I believe that this constitutes a 'fair use' of the copyrighted material as provided for in section 107 of the U.S. Copyright Law. If you wish to use this copyrighted material for purposes of your own that go beyond 'fair use,' you must obtain permission from the copyright owner, in this instance Yahoo News.. For more information go to: http://www.law.cornell.edu/uscode/17/107.shtml ------------------------------ From: Lisa Minter Subject: FCC to Vote on Wireless Access on Planes Date: Wed, 15 Dec 2004 09:57:07 EST [Lisa Minter note: As this issue of the Digest was being edited and prepared, the Associated Press news radio announced that the vote had been done and approved. Lisa M.] WASHINGTON - Federal regulators plan to vote Wednesday whether to allow air travelers wireless high-speed Internet access. And they plan to talk about, without a vote, whether to end the cell phone ban. The Federal Communications Commission also is looking again at the contentious issue of how to increase competition for local phone service. First, however, commissioners plan to deal with the airline issue. When it comes to communication, commercial airline passengers go from the Internet Age to the Stone Age once a plane takes off. They can't get a high-speed connection for their laptops. They can't use a wireless connection to check e-mail on domestic flights. They can't use their cell phones at all. David Stempler, president of the Air Travelers Association, a passenger group, said the changes under consideration would "make business travelers more efficient and while away the time for a lot of other passengers. This is all the wave of the future here." Currently, the only way passengers on domestic flights can communicate with the ground is through phones usually built into the seat backs. That service isn't very popular: It costs far more than conventional or cell phones; about $3.99 a minute; and the reception often is poor. Of the three companies that initially offered that service on commercial jets, only Verizon Airfone remains. It has phones on about 1,500 jets. The FCC is considering a measure that would restructure how frequencies for such "air-to-ground" services are used and allow the airlines to offer wireless high-speed Internet connections. Debate continues over how many companies the FCC would allow, through an auction, to offer such services. Verizon Airfone maintains that letting one company handle the service would ensure the best quality, and existing technology can't support two competitors. Others including Boeing Co. and AirCell argue for two competitors to prevent one company from having a monopoly. Once plans are completed and planes outfitted with the equipment, wireless high-speed Internet access might be found on commercial domestic flights by 2006, said Jack Blumenstein, chairman and CEO of Louisville, Colo.-based AirCell. The timeline on when air travelers would be able to start using cell phones in flight is murkier, in part because both the FCC and the Federal Aviation Administration ban the practice. The FCC took up the issue Wednesday in an effort to start public discussion, and commissioners might eventually relax the rules or lift the ban entirely. Of most concern to FCC officials is how using a cell phone in an airplane would interfere with cell phone use on the ground. The FAA is worried mainly about how airborne cell phone use would interfere with a plane's navigation and electrical systems, agency spokeswoman Laura Brown said. The technology used on seat-back phones and being considered for use for wireless Internet hookups causes no interference. The FAA has commissioned a private, independent firm to study the issue, and results aren't due until 2006. The FAA will not make its decision on cell phone use until after the study is completed, Brown said. Allowing high-speed Internet access and cell phone use on planes could offer cash-strapped airline companies a new source for revenues, said Doug Wills, spokesman for the Air Transport Association, the major airlines' trade group. Still, airlines must weigh the demand for such service against the desire of other passengers for a quiet cabin, Wills said. "Some people see a cell-free environment as a good thing," he said. The FCC could also take another stab Wednesday at rewriting regulations about local phone competition. The FCC's efforts have been overturned by courts three times, most recently in March by the U.S. Court of Appeals for the District of Columbia. The court threw out agency rules that allowed states to require regional carriers to lease parts of their networks to competitors at deep discounts. NOTE: For more telecom/internet/networking/computer news from the daily media, check out our feature 'Telecom Digest Extra' each day at http://telecom-digest.org/td-extra . New articles daily. *** FAIR USE NOTICE. This message contains copyrighted material the use of which has not been specifically authorized by the copyright owner. This Internet discussion group is making it available without profit to group members who have expressed a prior interest in receiving the included information in their efforts to advance the understanding of literary, educational, political, and economic issues, for non-profit research and educational purposes only. I believe that this constitutes a 'fair use' of the copyrighted material as provided for in section 107 of the U.S. Copyright Law. If you wish to use this copyrighted material for purposes of your own that go beyond 'fair use,' you must obtain permission from the copyright owner, in this instance Yahoo News. For more information go to: http://www.law.cornell.edu/uscode/17/107.shtml ------------------------------ Subject: Cross Battery and Verizon From: nospamperkowski1@optonline.net (Joe Perkowski) Organization: Your Organization Date: Wed, 15 Dec 2004 14:01:52 GMT Hey ppl, Does anyone know what is "cross battery"? We put in a NBX 2 months ago running fine. Now, we are getting static and crosstalk on some of our incoming lines. We have had a great deal of rain these past 2 weeks, and have had previously problems with Verizon due to old copper in our area. The Verizon guy is telling us "cross battery" is causing this? What is "cross battery" if anyone knows...? Thanks. Joe ------------------------------ Date: Wed, 15 Dec 2004 12:58:22 EST From: Telecom dailyLead from USTA Subject: Sprint, Nextel Directors Approve Merger Plan Telecom dailyLead from USTA December 15, 2004 http://www.dailylead.com/latestIssue.jsp?i=18135&l=2017006 TODAY'S HEADLINES NEWS OF THE DAY * Sprint, Nextel directors approve merger plan BUSINESS & INDUSTRY WATCH * Analysis: What's next for Nextel * EchoStar considers satellite Internet offering * Semiconductor sales to rise as VoIP adoption grows USTA SPOTLIGHT * McCormick Calls For Market-Driven Environment for Communications EMERGING TECHNOLOGIES * Phone music isn't just for on hold anymore REGULATORY & LEGISLATIVE * FCC approves in-flight Internet use * MPAA hits back at DVD pirates Follow the link below to read quick summaries of these stories and others. http://www.dailylead.com/latestIssue.jsp?i=18135&l=2017006 ------------------------------ From: Eric Friedebach Subject: Sprint Nextel, No. 3 With A Bullet Date: 15 Dec 2004 10:29:44 -0800 Organization: http://groups.google.com David M. Ewalt, 12.15.04, Forbes.com NEW YORK - Sprint and Nextel Communications announced a $35 billion combination today, setting in motion plans that could create a new, significantly strengthened No. 3 wireless carrier in the United States. "This creates three big wireless competitors carrying about 75% of the traffic," says independent telecom analyst Jeff Kagan. "Three major carriers can help keep prices low for customers, expenses lower for the companies and innovation high. The wireless industry needed this wave of consolidation." The new company -- to be called Sprint Nextel -- will boast a particularly strong base of corporate customers, and a total subscriber base of around 40 million customers. That will put it close behind No. 1 Cingular Wireless -- a joint venture between SBC Communications and BellSouth -- and No. 2 Verizon Wireless -- a joint venture of Verizon Communications and Vodafone Group. Under the terms of the deal, existing Sprint shares will remain outstanding, and each Nextel common share will be converted into new company shares and a small per-share amount of cash. The exact stock/cash allocation will be determined when the deal closes, but at current values, Nextel shareholders would receive about 1.28 Sprint Nextel shares and about 50 cents in cash for each share. The aggregate amount of the cash payment will not exceed $2.8 billion. http://www.forbes.com/services/2004/12/15/cx_de_1215sprintnextel2.html Eric Friedebach /KMPX Rocks!/ ------------------------------ From: Wesrock@aol.com Date: Wed, 15 Dec 2004 09:37:39 EST Subject: Alltel, Cingular, AT&T Wireless From The Daily Oklahoman (Oklahoma City) for December 15, 2004. Wes Leatherock wesrock@aol.com Cell phone users puzzled by change of carriers By Jim Stafford The Oklahoman Welcome to the bizarre world of Julie Solow and Dawson Blacklee, two Oklahoma City residents who are living in their own private versions of "cell hell" in the wake of the recent Cingular Wireless takeover of AT&T Wireless. Their world is filled with confusion over who is their wireless service provider and the prospect of paying early termination fees of nearly $200 for each cellular telephone they own. "All I did was call to get my landline fixed," Solow said Monday. "Now they (AT&T Wireless) are saying I owe more than $200." It all began when Cingular became the nation's largest wireless telephone service provider at the end of October with its purchase of AT&T Wireless. AT&T Wireless subscribers became Cingular customers except in Oklahoma City, 12 surrounding Oklahoma counties and a few other areas nationwide. The government ordered Cingular to sell AT&T assets in those areas, which it did. It sold Oklahoma City area assets to Little Rock, Ark.-based Alltel. Apparently, the requirement to sell the Oklahoma properties contributed to confusion for both consumers and some company representatives. Solow, a speech pathologist for the Putnam City School District, stumbled into her personal twilight zone innocently enough at the end of November. She called SBC Communications about problems with her SBC landline and was pointed to a toll-free 800 number on a follow-up call. The SBC representative offered Solow deals on broadband communications, as well as switching to Cingular, which is owned in a partnership between SBC and BellSouth. The salesman told her that AT&T Wireless customers could switch to Cingular because of the recent buyout. The offer appeared to be a bargain and Solow agreed to drop her AT&T Wireless service for Cingular and would receive a "cute little flip phone," and a $50 gift card all for a total of $18. However, later she found out about the early termination fee and soon was stuck with her new cell phone service and a big bill from her former wireless provider. "It's been terribly frustrating," Solow said. "I am just amazed. It wasn't like I was trying to find a new wireless company. "This is a big huge company. It's like giving someone a puppy and saying 'I'm going to take care of all of the vet bills' and then say, 'Oh, you can't have that puppy,' or 'If you keep that puppy, you have to pay all the vet bills for it.'" Tuesday, Solow said a Cingular representative had contacted her and promised the company would help her settle the early termination penalty with AT&T Wireless. Blacklee, an Oklahoma Highway Patrol trooper, walked into his twilight zone when he decided to switch to Cingular because he assumed that AT&T Wireless was owned by Cingular. He canceled two contracts and switched. Then he learned that AT&T Wireless was not owned by Cingular and he owed $175 early termination fee on each of two phones that he owned. Blacklee's efforts to negotiate with AT&T Wireless have been fruitless, and he said he fears many more customers are in the same situation. "I bet you that not one of them knew they were not going to be part of Cingular," he said. "Most of those people did not have a clue their contracts are going to Alltel and not Cingular." Cingular spokesman Frank Merriman said the company is working to minimize confusion caused by the takeover and the Oklahoma City area's exclusion from it. "I do apologize for customer confusion," he said. "You are not talking about a simple process." AT&T Wireless customers can wait, and by early next year, they will become Alltel customers, Merriman said. "Yet everyone of their commercials say 'AT&T, welcome to the Cingular family,'" said Blacklee, clearly unconvinced. ------------------------------ From: Lanceman Subject: AT&T CallVantage Service -- Your Thoughts Date: 15 Dec 2004 07:29:52 -0800 Organization: http://groups.google.com Hi - I am considering switching my local landline to the AT&T CallVantage service. I have also looked at Vonage, but am unable to move my local number with them. Anyone out there have good or bad experiences with the CallVantage service? Thanks in advance for your replies. Lance ------------------------------ From: John Bartley Date: Wed, 15 Dec 2004 12:25:44 -0500 Subject: Re: Is 'Transitional Fair Use' The Wave Of The Future? On Tue, 14 Dec 2004, Clark W. Griswold, Jr. wrote: > Dishplayer or one of the newer DVRs? What was the feature? 7100 w/ HD upgrade. IIRC, Search now has two new tick boxes; title only, or title and description. Like it. Topic drift alert. >>> In article , Monty Solomon >>> wrote: >>>> A middle-level executive at Time Warner has approached several cable >>>> companies and broached the idea of restricting the ability of >>>> customers who use those company's Digital Video Recorders to record >>>> several popular Time Warner TV programs. >> On Mon, 13 Dec 2004, in comp.dcom.telecom Barry Margolin >> wrote: >>> Sounds like another good reason to support standalone DVRs, like >>> ReplayTV and TiVo, rather than cableco-supplied DVR services. > In article , I wrote: >> Sadly, this is not an adequate solution. Unless you record a program >> off to tape, disc or PC media, programs can be deleted through the >> capabilities of existing, standalone equipment. >> TiVo and ReplayTV have already demonstrated their ability to change >> the programming on DVRs without the consent of the user, as has DISH >> Network. Unless the user hacks the hardware and its current code to >> prevent it, the DVR manufacturer can slipstream the ability to do >> exactly what Time Warner wants into a user's DVR. On Wed, 15 Dec 2004, in comp.dcom.telecom Barry Margolin wrote: > Sure, they *can* reprogram our systems. But I think these vendors > that are independent of the content providers and distributors are > less likely to do so. Yes, I know they've made some concessions to > content providers (ReplayTV removed Internet Video Sharing and > Commercial Advance from their newest DVR models, although they didn't > reprogram the older models that already had these features, and > hackers discovered how to add them back to the new models). But I > think they would be shooting themselves in the feet if they disabled > some of the basic functionality of the devices. Let's not forget, Tivo has also pledged to add their own commercials over the top of playback when a user fast forwards. If that isn't targeting the pedal extremities, I will invite a Californian to move next door to me. The downgrades from Tivo and ReplayTV and the no-consent upgrade of my Dish Player's software demonstrate the capability. The control over that is in the hands of the providers, not the consumer. Historically, that only means to compete, the provider has to distract the consumer, when the new and uninformed consumer makes a buying decision, or simply be the least worst provider, carefully avoiding making the thing so bad as to overcome consumer inertia. Solution? Consumer advocacy: Be smart, share info here and in other forums, document what's going on in web logs and link to them, explain the case we ll to others, and don't fergit to let Charlie Ergen (big banana at Echostar /DISH Network) and other industry suits know this is a deal-breaker for you After all, if it turns to trash, we can all go read a good e-book (e.g., < http://www.baen.com/library > ). ------------------------------ Subject: Re: Strange Wireless Problem From: William Warren Organization: Church of the Infinite Possibility Date: Wed, 15 Dec 2004 14:32:55 GMT On 13 Dec 2004 13:36:47 -0500, Rich Greenberg wrote: > In article , Matt B. > wrote: >> Hello all, >> I'm having a strange problem and I hope you can help ... A few >> co-workers are using wireless-enabled laptops. They are able to >> receive e-mail from the POP3 server, but are unable to send. They get >> the error "The server has timed out ... might be server problems, >> etc.." If they plug in to a wired connection, it works fine. >> Everyone is using Outlook 2000 or 2003. It doesn't matter where they >> are using the wireless connection -- at home, at the office, at >> great-grandma Edna's ... it all does the same thing ... and we are at >> a loss! Any suggestions would be greatly appreciated! > This is just a WAG, but the SMTP server may be set up to not accept > incoming wireless connections, or to accept them only on a different > port than the usual 25. I'd guess that the laptops are associating with wireless access points _OUTSIDE_ the company where they work; i.e., that they're able to retrieve POP mail because the POP server is accessible from anywhere on the Internet, but that the SMTP server they are reaching is (correctly) rejecting their login codes, since it's not at your company. I suggest a NetStumbler scan to find the nearby access points: you'll probably find serveral in nearby firms that you've been using by accident. You may either set your own access points to use encryption, or program the laptops to associated _only_ with the SSID's on your network. HTH. YMMV. William (Filter noise from my address for direct replies) ------------------------------ TELECOM Digest is an electronic journal devoted mostly but not exclusively to telecommunications topics. It is circulated anywhere there is email, in addition to various telecom forums on a variety of networks such as Compuserve and America On Line, Yahoo Groups, and other forums. It is also gatewayed to Usenet where it appears as the moderated newsgroup 'comp.dcom.telecom'. TELECOM Digest is a not-for-profit, mostly non-commercial educational service offered to the Internet by Patrick Townson. All the contents of the Digest are compilation-copyrighted. You may reprint articles in some other media on an occasional basis, but please attribute my work and that of the original author. Contact information: Patrick Townson/TELECOM Digest Post Office Box 50 Independence, KS 67301 Phone: 620-402-0134 Fax 1: 775-255-9970 Fax 2: 530-309-7234 Fax 3: 208-692-5145 Email: editor@telecom-digest.org Subscribe: telecom-subscribe@telecom-digest.org Unsubscribe:telecom-unsubscribe@telecom-digest.org This Digest is the oldest continuing e-journal about telecomm- unications on the Internet, having been founded in August, 1981 and published continuously since then. Our archives are available for your review/research. We believe we are the oldest e-zine/mailing list on the internet in any category! URL information: http://telecom-digest.org Anonymous FTP: mirror.lcs.mit.edu/telecom-archives/archives/ (or use our mirror site: ftp.epix.net/pub/telecom-archives) Email <==> FTP: telecom-archives@telecom-digest.org Send a simple, one line note to that automated address for a help file on how to use the automatic retrieval system for archives files. You can get desired files in email. ************************************************************************* * TELECOM Digest is partially funded by a grant from * * Judith Oppenheimer, President of ICB Inc. and purveyor of accurate * * 800 & Dot Com News, Intelligence, Analysis, and Consulting. * * http://ICBTollFree.com, http://1800TheExpert.com * * Views expressed herein should not be construed as representing * * views of Judith Oppenheimer or ICB Inc. * ************************************************************************* ICB Toll Free News. Contact information is not sold, rented or leased. One click a day feeds a person a meal. Go to http://www.thehungersite.com Copyright 2004 ICB, Inc. and TELECOM Digest. All rights reserved. Our attorney is Bill Levant, of Blue Bell, PA. ************************ DIRECTORY ASSISTANCE JUST 65 CENTS ONE OR TWO INQUIRIES CHARGED TO YOUR CREDIT CARD! REAL TIME, UP TO DATE! SPONSORED BY TELECOM DIGEST AND EASY411.COM SIGN UP AT http://www.easy411.com/telecomdigest ! ************************ --------------------------------------------------------------- Finally, the Digest is funded by gifts from generous readers such as yourself who provide funding in amounts deemed appropriate. Your help is important and appreciated. A suggested donation of fifty dollars per year per reader is considered appropriate. See our address above. Please make at least a single donation to cover the cost of processing your name to the mailing list. All opinions expressed herein are deemed to be those of the author. Any organizations listed are for identification purposes only and messages should not be considered any official expression by the organization. End of TELECOM Digest V23 #600 ******************************